White House Czars

The Republicans are earmarking bills to eliminate nine (9) WH Czar positions.

An article in POLITICO discusses this possibility and one commentator provides the following list from the Bush era:

The list of George Bush’s Czars:

Abstinence Czar (Randal Tobias)
AIDS Czar (4 Czars: Scott Evertz, Joe O’Neill, Carol Thompson, Jeffrey Crowley)
Bank Bailout Czar (Neel Kashkari)
Bioethics Czar ( Leon Kass)
Bird flu Czar (Stewart Simonson)
Birth control czar (Erik Keroack)
Budget czar (3 Czars: Mitchell Daniels, Joshua Bolton, Rob Portman)*
Clean Up Czar (2 Czars: Jessie Roberson & James Rispoli)
Communications Czar (Dan Bartlett)
Cyber Security Czar, Cyber Czar (2 Czars: Richard Clarke, Rod Beckstrom)
Democracy Czar (Elliott Abrams)
Domestic Policy Czar (Karl Rove)
Drug Czar (John P. Walters)
Faith-Based Czar, Faith Czar (4 Czars: Don Willett, John Dilulio, Jim Towey, Jay Hein)
Food Safety Czar (David W.K. Acheson)
Global AIDS Czar (2 Czars: Randall Tobias, Mark Dybul)
Health Czar for WTC, World Trade Center Health Czar (John Howard)
Health IT Czar (David Brailer)
Homeland Security Czar (Michael Chertoff)
Homeless Czar, Homelessness Czar (Phil Mangano)
Gulf Coast Reconstruction Czar, Hurricane Katrina Recovery Czar (Donald E. Powell)
Intelligence Czar (2 Czars: John Negroponte & John Michael McConnell)
Manufacturing Czar (2 Czars: Albert Frink & William G. Sutton)
Policy Czar (Micahel Gerson)
Public Diplomacy Czar (2 Czars: Karen Hughes & James Glassman)
Reading Czar (G. Reid Lyon)
Regulatory Czar (2 Czars: John D. Graham & Susan Dudley)
Science Czar (John Marburger)
Terrorism Czar (3 Czars: Richard A. Clarke, Wayne Downing, John O. Brennan)
War Czar (Douglas Lute)

* VLG Note– the Budget Czar listed above is actually the OMB Director job which is subject to Senate Confirmation.

Without otherwise going into this list and checking for accuracy still incomplete and not sure exactly should be listed for President Obama. I am opposed to the CZAR concept for many reasons, not least its deprivation of SENATE Advise and Consent and the completely opaque delegations of authority to this people. It is suggested in defense of the concept that these positions are to promote collaboration and cooperation and to be advisory only. Nothing could be further from the truth. When you are sitting in a WH meeting presided over by a CZAR there is no disclaimer of authority issued by the CZAR and in fact all in attendance presume that because the CZAR gets more Presidential face time than most Cabinet Secretaries they (the Czar) is speaking on behalf of the President and recommendations are not suggestions but directives from the WH. Whether the President actually has reviewed or issued these directives is unknown but I would error on the side that almost never has the President even heard of the initiative.

Yes a Cabinet government can be hard to organize policy wise, either development or implementation. But that hard work is called governance which is very hard work and in short supply in Washington in last several decades.

Well we shall see what comes of this effort to eliminate at least some of the CZARS but I certainly support it. And don’t doubt for a minute that most of these Czars have far more WH clout than most Cabinet Secretaries.


About vlg338

This entry was posted in Governance. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s