Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Congressional oversight - as in "lack of"
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, October 26, 2006

MG John Batiste and I have had little to agree on. But in this we are in agreement:
"The best thing that can happen right now is for one or both of our houses to go Democratic so we can have some oversight," Batiste, who led the Army's 1st Infantry Division in Iraq in 2004 and 2005, told Salon. Batiste describes himself as a "lifelong Republican." But now, he said, "It is time for a change."
One of the most critical failures of this Republican Congress, at least in my estimation, has been it's seeming refusal to conduct it's proper oversight function. Time and again, politics have gotten in the way of doing the proper job of this implied power. Interestingly, I'm of the opinion that had Congress exercised even a modicum of oversight, a) Repubicans might not be in the political mess in which they find themselves, and b) it is possible we might not be in the mess in Iraq in which we find ourselves.

Obviously that's conjecture, but what isn't conjecture is that in terms of Congressional oversight, the 109th Congress has defined a "do nothing" congress. And like Batiste, I hope to see that change.

However I'll believe this when I see it:
The military leaders also say that Democrats might be willing to put up the massive infusion of cash they believe will be required to fix a military stretched thin, and to permanently increase the size of the Army. In July 2005, Sen. Joseph Lieberman and Sen. Hillary Clinton introduced a bill that would boost the Army by 100,000 soldiers. In the House, Pennsylvania's John Murtha and Missouri's Ike Skelton, ranking Democrats in military matters, have also indicated support for a beefed-up military. While the Republican-controlled Congress passed legislation temporarily increasing the size of the Army, a permanent move in that direction is anathema to Rumsfeld — who has battled for a smaller, ever more technology-dependent military.
Not from the "peace-dividend" party who's last move was to drastically reduce the military's size.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
McQ, perhaps you are a bit dyslexic
Secretary Cheney, testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Jan. 31, 1992

Overall, since I’ve been Secretary, we will have taken the five-year defense program down by well over $300 billion. That’s the peace dividend. And now we’re adding to that another $50 billion of so-called peace dividend.

Congress has let me cancel a few programs. But you’ve squabbled and sometimes bickered and horse-traded and ended up forcing me to spend money on weapons that don’t fill a vital need in these times of tight budgets and new requirements. You’ve directed me to buy more M1s, F14s, and F16s - all great systems - but we have enough of them.
 
Written By: cindy b
URL: http://
Cindy: What part of "109th Congress" don’t you understand?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Oversight is the wrong word to use.

1) Oversight is superintendence or supervision.

2) Oversight can also mean a slight mistake such as using the wrong wording in legislation.

Congress does not superintend or supervise the Executive.

Congress can inquire into the necessity for a new law or rule for the Government or it can inquire into the application of the Rules for the Government and the laws it makes and change them if necessary. It usually has to make a new rule or law because of a new situation or to change the rule or law because of an oversight in making them in the first place ;)
 
Written By: Bill
URL: http://
Read the link, Bill. It is a common term used to refer to that which I wrote about.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider