S.679 - Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011

A bill to reduce the number of executive positions subject to Senate confirmation. view all titles (6)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to reduce the number of executive positions subject to Senate confirmation. as introduced.
  • Short: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 as introduced.
  • Short: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 as reported to senate.
  • Short: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 as passed senate.
  • Short: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 as passed house.
  • Short: Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 as enacted.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Brian62 04/20/2011 5:16am

This bill further erodes the constitutional power prescribed to Congress in Article II, Section 2 of the US Constitution; expands the power of the Executive Branch, reduces the place of the “people” through their elected representatives in Congress within the Federal Government and potentially expands the number of “czars” and the National and Federal Government, and clearly lays another brick in the road paving the way for a dictator. This bill should be strongly OPPOSED!
Think about this; if there is so much overwhelming work for Congress to do that they don’t have time to confirm executive positions and they must pass off their constitutional responsibility to the Executive Branch, then doesn’t that really say that Congress is doing more work than the should be? YES! If we return to the constitutional scope set forth by the founders then it would be logical to reduce the size and scope of the National and Federal Governments and have Congress act according the 10th Amendments.

sonofthefounders 05/11/2011 4:41pm

Amen, brother!

tphill 08/13/2012 12:08am

The vast majority of positions listed that would no longer need to be confirmed by the Senate do not need to be. Based on this bill the Senate is required to confirm far too many positions. But there are also several positions listed that should be confirmed by the Senate. Enough that it’s not acceptable to give them up for the other provisions of this bill.

ilene2theright1 08/21/2012 8:30pm

Well read the names- those are ‘the -got-a-goes!’
Too bad neither ‘house’ is in… my phone would be heating up! And the Republicans who voted Abstain- i guess are hiding their own deep down commitment- Just what our country needs- whimps & whimpetts!

phyl 08/29/2012 8:15am
in reply to Brian62 Apr 20, 2011 5:16am

Brian, I agree. It seems to me, perhaps there is too much time OFF, and not enough time doing their job! The government is out of control, too big.

markjustmark 11/25/2012 1:32pm

Well it looks like Mr. Cantor got this one by me.

Note to Mr. Cantor: What in the world were you thinking? This bill stinks to its core and all i had to do was see the name of the sponsor.

On the surface, “To reduce the number of executive positions subject to Senate confirmation” sounds good but something is whispering in my ear that AMERICANS won’t like what the Chuck is cooking.

Would it not have been easier to without funding (government shutdown?) until a budget is passed, that way we can fund ONLY WHAT IS NECESSARY.

Is this what you mean by “workng across the aisle?”

As i have maintained all along, please stop ‘working’ with the enemy. It is too dang expensive. We can’t afford, as it is, what we allegedly paid for with money we don’t have yet.


Vote on This Bill

15% Users Support Bill

28 in favor / 161 opposed
 

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments