Well like the article says, this has always been an executive power. The only difference now is that it's been delegated to a close presidential appointee. The power is arguably not a good thing, but this doesn't really change much.
I find it worrying because I have grown to have a distrust of this administration. And this expansion of powers seems ripe for abuse. The relative transparency of our capital markets is a great strength. I am not sure it should be so easy to bend that rule for security’s sake. Private companies don’t fall under SEC jurisdiction, so there are legal ways around SEC scrutiny.
Well that's just it, this isn't so much an expansion of power as a delegation of it. The intel czar wouldn't really do much with it without clearance from the prez, who already can do it if he wants. All things considered, I don't think the executive should have this power at all (I'm not even sure that there ought to be an intel czar), but I don't see much additional cause to worry here.
This story brought my attention to the original 1977 law that amended the 1934 law. So yes, it would be more precise for me to express my discomfort with the original law. Especially since I am uncomfortable with any President having such authority. This expansion only adds to the reason to be worried because now an additional person has the same authority, which I disapprove of.
Given how Bush has governed so far, I am not convinced that Bush would necessarily stay abreast of how the Intel. Czar would use his newly delegated power.
Comments 4
Reply
Reply
Reply
Given how Bush has governed so far, I am not convinced that Bush would necessarily stay abreast of how the Intel. Czar would use his newly delegated power.
Reply
Leave a comment