Where can I find a list of different congressional oversight cases?
Q. (for my Goverment report) Please, no conservative links, I'm not interested in fallacies and propaganda.
Asked by withafunnyheart - Wed Nov 14 14:06:11 2007 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. FINDLAW.COM ACLU v. nsa is and excellent case for your report click on link for case best regards
Answered by enrique7718 - Wed Nov 14 14:31:20 2007
Q. (for my Goverment report) Please, no conservative links, I'm not interested in fallacies and propaganda.
Asked by withafunnyheart - Wed Nov 14 14:06:11 2007 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. FINDLAW.COM ACLU v. nsa is and excellent case for your report click on link for case best regards
Answered by enrique7718 - Wed Nov 14 14:31:20 2007
There once was a thing called "Congressional oversight" what happened to it.?
Q. Why does everyone always act so surprised when the intelligence services do things to make it harder to investigate them or provide (necessary) government oversight over their activities? The destruction of the CIA interrogation tapes that involve "waterboarding" is a perfect example. Doesn't anyone remember the history of these agencies? They get out of line every decade or so and only congressional investigations act to provide any outside restraint. Remember the Church and Pike committee hearings in the 1970's? The Iran-Contra hearings in the 1980's? It is a pity our congress is so pathetic these days, because they would never take the political flak that such hearings would generate today for them. Which means that the word "oversigh [cont.]
Asked by TheDude - Wed Dec 26 06:11:55 2007 - - 7 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I think the issue of "Congressional Oversight" has become a political tool to use against the other guy. All you have to do is look at the attendance records of these various committees and see how often members are absent. It only appears that these investigations crop up when one party holds the Senate and another the White House. If a party holds both, you don't have these investigations.
Answered by rotorhead - Wed Dec 26 07:37:24 2007
Q. Why does everyone always act so surprised when the intelligence services do things to make it harder to investigate them or provide (necessary) government oversight over their activities? The destruction of the CIA interrogation tapes that involve "waterboarding" is a perfect example. Doesn't anyone remember the history of these agencies? They get out of line every decade or so and only congressional investigations act to provide any outside restraint. Remember the Church and Pike committee hearings in the 1970's? The Iran-Contra hearings in the 1980's? It is a pity our congress is so pathetic these days, because they would never take the political flak that such hearings would generate today for them. Which means that the word "oversigh [cont.]
Asked by TheDude - Wed Dec 26 06:11:55 2007 - - 7 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I think the issue of "Congressional Oversight" has become a political tool to use against the other guy. All you have to do is look at the attendance records of these various committees and see how often members are absent. It only appears that these investigations crop up when one party holds the Senate and another the White House. If a party holds both, you don't have these investigations.
Answered by rotorhead - Wed Dec 26 07:37:24 2007
What are specific examples of congressional oversight.?
Q. like a specific event.
Asked by Jocelyn - Sun Apr 19 16:48:42 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Legislative hearings such as the ones trying to figure out what went wrong during Katrina, or with the current economic crisis. Audits of the Executive Branch such as those by the General Accounting Office of actual spending by agencies such as: "Contingency Contracting: DOD, State, and USAID Are Taking Actions to Track Contracts and Contractor Personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan"
Answered by PennyLeeD2 - Sun Apr 19 20:15:33 2009
Q. like a specific event.
Asked by Jocelyn - Sun Apr 19 16:48:42 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Legislative hearings such as the ones trying to figure out what went wrong during Katrina, or with the current economic crisis. Audits of the Executive Branch such as those by the General Accounting Office of actual spending by agencies such as: "Contingency Contracting: DOD, State, and USAID Are Taking Actions to Track Contracts and Contractor Personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan"
Answered by PennyLeeD2 - Sun Apr 19 20:15:33 2009
Should Obama's Policy Czars be vetted by Congress as they create policy which is under Congressional oversight?
Q. traditionally and via the Constitution?
Asked by pznbob - Wed Sep 16 14:34:46 2009 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well if you wanted to work within the Constitution ... YES! They are creating policy, they are responsible to Congress as is the Cabinet, by law. And a little bit of the promised Transparency wouldn't be such a bad idea either, though Obviously when Obama said it, he had no intention of honoring his word. That's becoming well understood as business as usual with him.
Answered by Obama Lied And Freedom Died - Wed Sep 16 14:40:07 2009
Q. traditionally and via the Constitution?
Asked by pznbob - Wed Sep 16 14:34:46 2009 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well if you wanted to work within the Constitution ... YES! They are creating policy, they are responsible to Congress as is the Cabinet, by law. And a little bit of the promised Transparency wouldn't be such a bad idea either, though Obviously when Obama said it, he had no intention of honoring his word. That's becoming well understood as business as usual with him.
Answered by Obama Lied And Freedom Died - Wed Sep 16 14:40:07 2009
Is Bush Making Impeachment The Only Option of Congressional Oversight/Check On His Presidency?
Q. He refuses to honor any subpoenas. He obstructs justice on a daily basis. He vetoes everything in sight. I think he's painting the Congress into a corner, and there's a problem when you do that...you paint yourself into the corner too.
Asked by My yahoo tool bar disappeared? - Tue Jul 10 04:55:49 2007 - - 9 Answers - 1 Comments
A. Don't forget, he won't let anyone be questioned under oath! He wants discussions, "Off the record". His oath of office should qualify to be always under oath while President! Therefore, He has lied under oath!
Answered by little timmie - Sat Jul 14 02:06:06 2007
Q. He refuses to honor any subpoenas. He obstructs justice on a daily basis. He vetoes everything in sight. I think he's painting the Congress into a corner, and there's a problem when you do that...you paint yourself into the corner too.
Asked by My yahoo tool bar disappeared? - Tue Jul 10 04:55:49 2007 - - 9 Answers - 1 Comments
A. Don't forget, he won't let anyone be questioned under oath! He wants discussions, "Off the record". His oath of office should qualify to be always under oath while President! Therefore, He has lied under oath!
Answered by little timmie - Sat Jul 14 02:06:06 2007
If Bush's party loses either house, will we get congressional oversight back?
Q. I am thinking they will steal this election too - to avoid the hearings, inquiries, and investigations that are bound to follow. They will HAVE to steal it to avoid prosecution.
Asked by planksheer - Thu Oct 19 08:31:14 2006 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Certainly! It looked like the Republicans have ran amok in the last 12 years. They pretty much did away with Congressional oversight. With the Democrats poised to regain control of Congress in the mid-terms in a few weeks, all of that is about to change. As for the impeachment matter for the President, that will be one as well! Now I began to wonder if they steal the mid-term elections, we are going to suffer even more!
Answered by brian 2010 - Thu Oct 19 08:55:25 2006
Q. I am thinking they will steal this election too - to avoid the hearings, inquiries, and investigations that are bound to follow. They will HAVE to steal it to avoid prosecution.
Asked by planksheer - Thu Oct 19 08:31:14 2006 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Certainly! It looked like the Republicans have ran amok in the last 12 years. They pretty much did away with Congressional oversight. With the Democrats poised to regain control of Congress in the mid-terms in a few weeks, all of that is about to change. As for the impeachment matter for the President, that will be one as well! Now I began to wonder if they steal the mid-term elections, we are going to suffer even more!
Answered by brian 2010 - Thu Oct 19 08:55:25 2006
What is happening with Iraq Reconstruction? What is the Congressional Oversight committee doing about it?
Q. Rep. Waxman and other members of Congress have been seeking information on contracts entered into by the Administration for reconstruction and development work in Iraq, including several billion dollar contracts with a subsidiary of Halliburton Corporation. Many questions have been raised about the Iraq contracting process, including questions on the seemingly inflated prices charged by Halliburton to import gasoline from Kuwait into Iraq and Halliburton's admission of kickbacks to company officials. "If the government in Iraq is so corrupt that our State Department won t even tell us about it if it s so corrupt that it is undermining any chance of political progress, then how can we ask our brave men and women to risk their lives there? [cont.]
Asked by Naturescent - Thu Dec 27 09:41:53 2007 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Just continuing to cut the checks for Haliburton, I hope and believe that this will change very soon after the 2008 elections. For some reason they seem paralyzed when it comes to taking substantial, corrective and/ or punitive action against Haliburton, Blackwater and many other contractors.
Answered by HP - Thu Dec 27 09:58:22 2007
Q. Rep. Waxman and other members of Congress have been seeking information on contracts entered into by the Administration for reconstruction and development work in Iraq, including several billion dollar contracts with a subsidiary of Halliburton Corporation. Many questions have been raised about the Iraq contracting process, including questions on the seemingly inflated prices charged by Halliburton to import gasoline from Kuwait into Iraq and Halliburton's admission of kickbacks to company officials. "If the government in Iraq is so corrupt that our State Department won t even tell us about it if it s so corrupt that it is undermining any chance of political progress, then how can we ask our brave men and women to risk their lives there? [cont.]
Asked by Naturescent - Thu Dec 27 09:41:53 2007 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Just continuing to cut the checks for Haliburton, I hope and believe that this will change very soon after the 2008 elections. For some reason they seem paralyzed when it comes to taking substantial, corrective and/ or punitive action against Haliburton, Blackwater and many other contractors.
Answered by HP - Thu Dec 27 09:58:22 2007
would you feel more comfortable if the czars were appointed by congressional hearing?
Q. or maybe if they were voted in? or do you think the current system of appointment by president with no congressional oversight works well? czars were not a communist deal. They were the rulers before the revolution. m-w.com defines czar as: 1: emperor ; specifically : the ruler of Russia until the 1917 revolution 2: one having great power or authority i do not approve of obama or his many appointed czars. i also do not approve of ignorance. I will proudly be in the minority in my lack of blind praise of obama. i would prefer to be in the minority that sees things clearly than in the majority of sheep.
Asked by ? - Tue Jul 21 14:40:57 2009 - - 12 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I hate to disagree with the intellectually vacant who simply rubber-stamp everything that spawns from the Obama administration... ... I would feel more comfortable, and it would actually resemble America if Obama adhered to the Constitution dammit (other presidents are guilty of this too), and didn't appoint ANY czars. You're not in the minority, my friend. Even thus, you're there isn't a landslide to pure socialism or totalitarianism... yet.
Answered by Shawn McGraw - Tue Jul 21 15:18:46 2009
Q. or maybe if they were voted in? or do you think the current system of appointment by president with no congressional oversight works well? czars were not a communist deal. They were the rulers before the revolution. m-w.com defines czar as: 1: emperor ; specifically : the ruler of Russia until the 1917 revolution 2: one having great power or authority i do not approve of obama or his many appointed czars. i also do not approve of ignorance. I will proudly be in the minority in my lack of blind praise of obama. i would prefer to be in the minority that sees things clearly than in the majority of sheep.
Asked by ? - Tue Jul 21 14:40:57 2009 - - 12 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I hate to disagree with the intellectually vacant who simply rubber-stamp everything that spawns from the Obama administration... ... I would feel more comfortable, and it would actually resemble America if Obama adhered to the Constitution dammit (other presidents are guilty of this too), and didn't appoint ANY czars. You're not in the minority, my friend. Even thus, you're there isn't a landslide to pure socialism or totalitarianism... yet.
Answered by Shawn McGraw - Tue Jul 21 15:18:46 2009
which is not a means of congressional oversight? a.commite hearings b.GAO c.informal inquires d. press leaks?
Q. which is not a means of congressional oversight? a.commite hearings b.GAO c.informal inquires d. press leaks?
Asked by RainbowSUNSHINE26 - Wed Oct 28 03:00:23 2009 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well the leaking of General Mc Chrystal's report and recommendation for more troops was leaked to force Obama to make a decision rather than bury the report. I don't know if it is congressional oversight but it sure is oversight.
Answered by Joe in texas - Wed Oct 28 03:12:26 2009
Q. which is not a means of congressional oversight? a.commite hearings b.GAO c.informal inquires d. press leaks?
Asked by RainbowSUNSHINE26 - Wed Oct 28 03:00:23 2009 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Well the leaking of General Mc Chrystal's report and recommendation for more troops was leaked to force Obama to make a decision rather than bury the report. I don't know if it is congressional oversight but it sure is oversight.
Answered by Joe in texas - Wed Oct 28 03:12:26 2009
President B. Hussein Obama has 34 Czars. Should they have congressional oversight? Should they be vetted?
Q. Did the salaries for these Czar's come from the porkulous bill? The first two are confused about how YA works. I give up 5 points, and I get to ASK the question. You two answer the question, and get two points. You don't get to ask questions instead of answer. This PSA was from NBC's "The more you know" segment. Please enjoy!
Asked by Yahoo Answer Angel - Mon Sep 7 16:06:45 2009 - - 18 Answers - 0 Comments
A. "Czar" is a press-created term, dating from the early 70's, to describe a special class of investigative/advisory consultants created outside the enforcement end of the executive branch, to look into issues separate from the need to conform to extant law. That is: way back then, Nixon created a drug adviser to supply him with information and ideas that weren't simply about arresting more people. It has nothing to do with Ivan Grozny or Alexander or Nicholas, the "Czars" of Russia's old, medieval monarchy, as anachronistic and ridiculous as that ancient office always was. They have never had much power, despite your absurd projections. Your reference to the fat scum bag pig Limbaugh's maggoty term "porkulous", which I presume is… [cont.]
Answered by me - Mon Sep 7 16:42:41 2009
Q. Did the salaries for these Czar's come from the porkulous bill? The first two are confused about how YA works. I give up 5 points, and I get to ASK the question. You two answer the question, and get two points. You don't get to ask questions instead of answer. This PSA was from NBC's "The more you know" segment. Please enjoy!
Asked by Yahoo Answer Angel - Mon Sep 7 16:06:45 2009 - - 18 Answers - 0 Comments
A. "Czar" is a press-created term, dating from the early 70's, to describe a special class of investigative/advisory consultants created outside the enforcement end of the executive branch, to look into issues separate from the need to conform to extant law. That is: way back then, Nixon created a drug adviser to supply him with information and ideas that weren't simply about arresting more people. It has nothing to do with Ivan Grozny or Alexander or Nicholas, the "Czars" of Russia's old, medieval monarchy, as anachronistic and ridiculous as that ancient office always was. They have never had much power, despite your absurd projections. Your reference to the fat scum bag pig Limbaugh's maggoty term "porkulous", which I presume is… [cont.]
Answered by me - Mon Sep 7 16:42:41 2009
who is nasa's congressional connection and oversight committee?
Q. who is nasa's congressional connection and oversight committee?
Asked by mrysnshn - Thu Oct 18 22:52:58 2007 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The Committee on Science and Technology would probably have the most direct oversight of NASA, but because NASA relies on government appropriations, they must also answer to both the House and Senate Appropriation Committees.
Answered by chiachera - Sun Oct 21 22:54:47 2007
Q. who is nasa's congressional connection and oversight committee?
Asked by mrysnshn - Thu Oct 18 22:52:58 2007 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The Committee on Science and Technology would probably have the most direct oversight of NASA, but because NASA relies on government appropriations, they must also answer to both the House and Senate Appropriation Committees.
Answered by chiachera - Sun Oct 21 22:54:47 2007
Why's Bush43 offering explanations for the way he has ruled as President w/o any real Congressional oversight?
Q. The word "rule" is meant to point to the manner of leadership which has lately not been as democratic as I expect it to be based on my experience with Presidents going back to IKE & JFK. Pls avoid meaningless labels ansd stick to explaining ideas like the analyst did! Don't like my Q? Then Skip it. A the Q asked! Why is he explaining himself now? Joe R in an A to another Q reminded us of this fact: "Millions of us knew he was lying about Iraq, which, BTW, had NOTHING to do with 9-11. <<>> "I'm the commander see, I don't need to explain I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting thing about being president." as quoted in Bob Woodward's Bush at War" This in reply to this Q: Open… [cont.]
Asked by heeltap - Mon Jun 16 10:34:46 2008 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. There are three branches of government; The executive The judicial The legislative The duties and powers are all defined in the constitution. There is a distinct separation between the powers . This separation is a system of checks and balances , which you may be confusing with oversight Oversight of the executive is NOT a duty, nor power vested in the congress, the same as the congress does not have oversight power of the Supreme Court (i.e. the judicial) As has been stated previously by others here; the president does not rule . Analyst, Ph.D.
Answered by Last Ranger - Mon Jun 16 11:27:59 2008
Q. The word "rule" is meant to point to the manner of leadership which has lately not been as democratic as I expect it to be based on my experience with Presidents going back to IKE & JFK. Pls avoid meaningless labels ansd stick to explaining ideas like the analyst did! Don't like my Q? Then Skip it. A the Q asked! Why is he explaining himself now? Joe R in an A to another Q reminded us of this fact: "Millions of us knew he was lying about Iraq, which, BTW, had NOTHING to do with 9-11. <<
Asked by heeltap - Mon Jun 16 10:34:46 2008 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. There are three branches of government; The executive The judicial The legislative The duties and powers are all defined in the constitution. There is a distinct separation between the powers . This separation is a system of checks and balances , which you may be confusing with oversight Oversight of the executive is NOT a duty, nor power vested in the congress, the same as the congress does not have oversight power of the Supreme Court (i.e. the judicial) As has been stated previously by others here; the president does not rule . Analyst, Ph.D.
Answered by Last Ranger - Mon Jun 16 11:27:59 2008
Should Dodd be impeached for taking a sweetheart mortgage deal during the time that he failed to oversight biz?
Q. We suffered through a major financial collapse due to congressional failure to oversight the mortgage market which polluted all sorts of investment assets and triggered a selling rush that left our GDP in a multi-trillion dollar hole. Should he be impeached by the citizens of the United States right away? Is there a petition somewhere to get this done!?
Asked by Ophelia - Fri Jul 31 14:16:15 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. They should send him & his cancer to unemployment hell. Sorry but i really hate corrupt politicians, especially the self-righteous, sanctimonious and hypocritical ones. If I had my way, I'd have them all tried for treason after they are impeached. They are betraying their oath of office when they take a bribe or a kick-back.
Answered by Not "THE ONE" - Fri Jul 31 14:26:45 2009
Q. We suffered through a major financial collapse due to congressional failure to oversight the mortgage market which polluted all sorts of investment assets and triggered a selling rush that left our GDP in a multi-trillion dollar hole. Should he be impeached by the citizens of the United States right away? Is there a petition somewhere to get this done!?
Asked by Ophelia - Fri Jul 31 14:16:15 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. They should send him & his cancer to unemployment hell. Sorry but i really hate corrupt politicians, especially the self-righteous, sanctimonious and hypocritical ones. If I had my way, I'd have them all tried for treason after they are impeached. They are betraying their oath of office when they take a bribe or a kick-back.
Answered by Not "THE ONE" - Fri Jul 31 14:26:45 2009
Why are there congressional hearings on wrongdoing in professional sports?
Q. Are these questions being asked in a "Public Health" type of hearing (as pertaining to the MLB doping scandal)? In the near future there may be a congressional hearing regarding the cheating allegations against the NFL's Patriots. Sen Arlen Specter has been holding talks with the commissioner to see why he destroyed the evidence. How come congress has oversight in these matters? I am looking for a scholarly answer; How is this a government matter? Was there a precedent set in the past? or is there some law mandating professional sports?
Asked by Vivian - Fri Feb 15 10:17:03 2008 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
Q. Are these questions being asked in a "Public Health" type of hearing (as pertaining to the MLB doping scandal)? In the near future there may be a congressional hearing regarding the cheating allegations against the NFL's Patriots. Sen Arlen Specter has been holding talks with the commissioner to see why he destroyed the evidence. How come congress has oversight in these matters? I am looking for a scholarly answer; How is this a government matter? Was there a precedent set in the past? or is there some law mandating professional sports?
Asked by Vivian - Fri Feb 15 10:17:03 2008 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
How far to the left is 0bama's collection of Czars and advisors?
Q. These people have great power with no congressional oversight... How far to the left are they?
Asked by Jimmbbo - Mon Aug 24 14:32:34 2009 - - 14 Answers - 1 Comments
A. As far as I can tell everyone in the BO administration is a far left communist-fascist-sociali st. They've been trying to take over for decades now and it's finally happened. Americans have woken up, but it may be too late to save the country.
Answered by Imagine - Mon Aug 24 15:52:48 2009
Q. These people have great power with no congressional oversight... How far to the left are they?
Asked by Jimmbbo - Mon Aug 24 14:32:34 2009 - - 14 Answers - 1 Comments
A. As far as I can tell everyone in the BO administration is a far left communist-fascist-sociali st. They've been trying to take over for decades now and it's finally happened. Americans have woken up, but it may be too late to save the country.
Answered by Imagine - Mon Aug 24 15:52:48 2009
The Congressional Pages are subjected to Republican Predators should the Page Dpt be closed for their safety?
Q. Even though an ethics panel found that Republican Congressional "Leaders" knew of predatory and abusive actions toward Congressional Pages for many as 10 years, no one was disciplined or even given a warning. With this kind of lack of oversight or protection from these "Bottom of the Barrell" legislators The college of pages should be closed, unfortunately.
Asked by Quotidian - Sun Dec 10 21:35:50 2006 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. No, but they should be housed in VA at night, so if a congressman commits any crime they can be arrested. Either that or actually enforce the rules already in place. Don't let the actions of a single individual ruin an entire institution.
Answered by The Big Box - Sun Dec 10 21:41:24 2006
Q. Even though an ethics panel found that Republican Congressional "Leaders" knew of predatory and abusive actions toward Congressional Pages for many as 10 years, no one was disciplined or even given a warning. With this kind of lack of oversight or protection from these "Bottom of the Barrell" legislators The college of pages should be closed, unfortunately.
Asked by Quotidian - Sun Dec 10 21:35:50 2006 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. No, but they should be housed in VA at night, so if a congressman commits any crime they can be arrested. Either that or actually enforce the rules already in place. Don't let the actions of a single individual ruin an entire institution.
Answered by The Big Box - Sun Dec 10 21:41:24 2006
Should the Presidential candidates have some idea about what the SPP is NOW while on the campaign road?
Q. And if they do what is their opinion on it and also what they think about the fact that this has ZERO congressional oversight? Has the media even ASKED about this? If they have not asked about this, WHY NOT???
Asked by Fedup Veteran - Mon May 12 18:53:24 2008 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The candidates are all acutely aware that the Security and Prosperity Partnership is the government's program to implement the North American Union. They don't speak about it because we are not supposed to know about it. The government is implementing North American Union in stealth mode, hiding it in plain view. If the people knew what was really happening, the top three candidates (Obama, Clinton, McCain) would instantly become unelectable. They are all beholden to the Council on Foreign Relations, one of the main proponents behind the North American Union agenda. Obama likes to play dumb, as he does here: "Obama is a Liar" Give me a break!!! How stupid does he think the people are? Obama's statement "I don't think there is a… [cont.]
Answered by Laurie - Wed May 14 14:22:12 2008
Q. And if they do what is their opinion on it and also what they think about the fact that this has ZERO congressional oversight? Has the media even ASKED about this? If they have not asked about this, WHY NOT???
Asked by Fedup Veteran - Mon May 12 18:53:24 2008 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The candidates are all acutely aware that the Security and Prosperity Partnership is the government's program to implement the North American Union. They don't speak about it because we are not supposed to know about it. The government is implementing North American Union in stealth mode, hiding it in plain view. If the people knew what was really happening, the top three candidates (Obama, Clinton, McCain) would instantly become unelectable. They are all beholden to the Council on Foreign Relations, one of the main proponents behind the North American Union agenda. Obama likes to play dumb, as he does here: "Obama is a Liar" Give me a break!!! How stupid does he think the people are? Obama's statement "I don't think there is a… [cont.]
Answered by Laurie - Wed May 14 14:22:12 2008
How many senators do the oil executives have in their pockets?
Q. A) 87 B) 89 C) 93 D) Super 95 So they called them in for a congressional oversight committee.. how'd that go?
Asked by Answerer - Mon Apr 21 18:13:20 2008 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. E.) ALL of them !!! Gary
Answered by gary s - Mon Apr 21 18:17:50 2008
Q. A) 87 B) 89 C) 93 D) Super 95 So they called them in for a congressional oversight committee.. how'd that go?
Asked by Answerer - Mon Apr 21 18:13:20 2008 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. E.) ALL of them !!! Gary
Answered by gary s - Mon Apr 21 18:17:50 2008
Are the American people going to buy this?
Q. "Bush Balks at Criteria for FEMA Director Signing Statement Asserts Right to Ignore Parts of New Homeland Security Law Saturday, October 7, 2006 President Bush reserved the right to ignore key changes in Congress's overhaul of the Federal Emergency Management Agency -- including a requirement to appoint someone with experience handling disasters as the agency's head -- in setting aside dozens of provisions contained in a major homeland security spending bill this week. Besides objecting to Congress's list of qualifications for FEMA's director, the White House also claimed the right to edit or withhold reports to Congress by a watchdog agency within the Department of Homeland Security that is responsible for protecting Americans'… [cont.]
Asked by phoxee2003 - Tue Oct 10 09:07:05 2006 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Then why have a government?
Answered by dukalink6000 - Tue Oct 10 09:08:36 2006
Q. "Bush Balks at Criteria for FEMA Director Signing Statement Asserts Right to Ignore Parts of New Homeland Security Law Saturday, October 7, 2006 President Bush reserved the right to ignore key changes in Congress's overhaul of the Federal Emergency Management Agency -- including a requirement to appoint someone with experience handling disasters as the agency's head -- in setting aside dozens of provisions contained in a major homeland security spending bill this week. Besides objecting to Congress's list of qualifications for FEMA's director, the White House also claimed the right to edit or withhold reports to Congress by a watchdog agency within the Department of Homeland Security that is responsible for protecting Americans'… [cont.]
Asked by phoxee2003 - Tue Oct 10 09:07:05 2006 - - 6 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Then why have a government?
Answered by dukalink6000 - Tue Oct 10 09:08:36 2006
If Bush and Cheney aren't Impeached, What Will the Next President Do?
Q. Bush has given himself extraordinary powers. He has passed the Patriot Act and believes he can declare War without Congressional approval, without anyone's approval. He has claimed the right to wiretap citizens without warrants...all in the name of terror. The possibility of terrorist attacks will remain with us for centuries. The danger of not impeaching both Bush and Cheney and stripping them of these Constitutionally Illegal powers is that the next President may claim them for him or herself, thus ignoring the Constitution to make the Executive Branch one that is above reproach, with no Congressional Oversight. Despite investigations, Bush has evaded giving documents, e-mails or answers. The next President may cling to this same… [cont.]
Asked by Me, Too - Sat Nov 3 16:12:50 2007 - - 12 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Neither House or Senate are going to pass a resolution to impreach Bush and Cheney. Not going to happen. So think and chose carefully who the next President is going to be. Ask those questions that concern you. Think. Act rationally and don't be swayed by fear which is really how Bush got reelected. Don't sit on your hands and do nothing. Vote for who will come closest to meeting your concerns.
Answered by Robert S - Sat Nov 3 16:32:53 2007
Q. Bush has given himself extraordinary powers. He has passed the Patriot Act and believes he can declare War without Congressional approval, without anyone's approval. He has claimed the right to wiretap citizens without warrants...all in the name of terror. The possibility of terrorist attacks will remain with us for centuries. The danger of not impeaching both Bush and Cheney and stripping them of these Constitutionally Illegal powers is that the next President may claim them for him or herself, thus ignoring the Constitution to make the Executive Branch one that is above reproach, with no Congressional Oversight. Despite investigations, Bush has evaded giving documents, e-mails or answers. The next President may cling to this same… [cont.]
Asked by Me, Too - Sat Nov 3 16:12:50 2007 - - 12 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Neither House or Senate are going to pass a resolution to impreach Bush and Cheney. Not going to happen. So think and chose carefully who the next President is going to be. Ask those questions that concern you. Think. Act rationally and don't be swayed by fear which is really how Bush got reelected. Don't sit on your hands and do nothing. Vote for who will come closest to meeting your concerns.
Answered by Robert S - Sat Nov 3 16:32:53 2007
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'Congressional oversight'
Thu Dec 24 20:26:18 2009 [ refresh local cache ]
[Hide]▼
news.google.com
Minyanville.com
In its latest monthly report, the Congressional Oversight Panel said the Treasury Department should consider expanding bailout programs to rid bank balance ...
huffingtonpost.com
The Huffington Post News Editors
Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:00:00 GM
But the issue of . congressional oversight. of national security affairs is particularly sensitive. Democrats in . Congress. have repeatedly protested what they said was a deliberate attempt by former President George W. Bush to keep them in ...
[Hide]▲
