4 ms·

With this and SCOTUS neutering Humphrey’s Executor (with Federal Reserve penumbras -- for now) I'm wondering if there will be a push in the future to establish

With this and SCOTUS neutering Humphrey’s Executor (with Federal Reserve penumbras -- for now) I'm wondering if there will be a push in the future to establish a 4th branch (call it the deep state branch) to protect what should be non-political stuff like the federal reserve and BLS statistics. Like the judiciary, nominated by President, confirmed by the senate, funded by congress, impeachable, limited executive authority, etc.

andrewflnr 1y ago
If we're launching a fourth branch of government, it should be explicitly aimed at enforcing the Constitution on the government. Having the judiciary try to do that and all the other adjudication is not working.
actionfromafar 1y ago
We thought we already had that for a bunch of stuff. Turns out, words on paper don't matter if Congress says nothing, the Executive goes rampant, and the SCOTUS either stays suspiciously quiet or gives an approving nod and wink here and there.
krapp 1y ago
>I'm wondering if there will be a push in the future to establish a 4th branch (call it the deep state branch) to protect what should be non-political stuff like the federal reserve and BLS statistics. Now you have four problems, as it were. If the thesis is that the government can't be trusted to run its own affairs, then more government isn't a solution. The actual "fourth branch" of government is supposed to be the people, either giving a shit and being engaged in their civic duty and not electing tyrants for entertainment value or to "own the libs," or else doing the other thing that Americans love to talk about doing.
mtts 1y ago
Interestingly, this is what the EU is. After WW2 it was decided to set things up so that European countries no longer could wage war against each other. Hence starting out with coal and steel (no war without those). In such a setup, lack of democratic oversight is not a bug but a feature. It prevents democratically elected but possibly not entirely stable governments from doing something stupid. The drawback, of course, is that it also prevents democratically elected and intensely well meaning governments from doing the right thing if the supranational entity does not wish to facilitate that right thing. This setup works (after a fashion) for a group of small and fairly weak countries, but for a single large and powerful country like the US there simply isn’t a supranational entity powerful enough to reign it in.

andrewflnr 1y ago

If we're launching a fourth branch of government, it should be explicitly aimed at enforcing the Constitution on the government. Having the judiciary try to do that and all the other adjudication is not working.

actionfromafar 1y ago

We thought we already had that for a bunch of stuff. Turns out, words on paper don't matter if Congress says nothing, the Executive goes rampant, and the SCOTUS either stays suspiciously quiet or gives an approving nod and wink here and there.

krapp 1y ago

>I'm wondering if there will be a push in the future to establish a 4th branch (call it the deep state branch) to protect what should be non-political stuff like the federal reserve and BLS statistics. Now you have four problems, as it were. If the thesis is that the government can't be trusted to run its own affairs, then more government isn't a solution. The actual "fourth branch" of government is supposed to be the people, either giving a shit and being engaged in their civic duty and not electing tyrants for entertainment value or to "own the libs," or else doing the other thing that Americans love to talk about doing.

mtts 1y ago

Interestingly, this is what the EU is. After WW2 it was decided to set things up so that European countries no longer could wage war against each other. Hence starting out with coal and steel (no war without those). In such a setup, lack of democratic oversight is not a bug but a feature. It prevents democratically elected but possibly not entirely stable governments from doing something stupid. The drawback, of course, is that it also prevents democratically elected and intensely well meaning governments from doing the right thing if the supranational entity does not wish to facilitate that right thing. This setup works (after a fashion) for a group of small and fairly weak countries, but for a single large and powerful country like the US there simply isn’t a supranational entity powerful enough to reign it in.