What are American Czars?

Lately we've been hearing a lot about czars. But aren't czars what Russia called their rulers before going communist? Thats true, but now the term is being used on the Obama administration, and not with a positive connotation.

The term "czar" did originate in Russia. In America, we tend to attach a negative connotation to the word along the lines of "an all-powerful, micro-managing tyrant." The word first appeared in the States during the Reagan administration. The "Drug Czar" oversaw the war on drug traffiking and usage, but was, for the most part, unsuccessful and costly.

The concept of a czar in American government was put aside for the most part until the Bush Sr. administration. President Bush Sr. appointed "czars" for several issues in the American government.

American czars in the 21st Century, according to the Obama administration, are "newly created positions imbued with unprecedented authority to cut through the bureaucracy and get things done" (Lute 1). So far President Obama has appointed czars to oversee government action in several areas; Katrina relief, economy, technology, climate, health care, energy, and intelligence, just to name a few. The purpose of the czar is to regulate and oversee the governmental involvement in these areas of interest.

The Obama administration has created the following "czar" positions:

• Drug Czar - responsible for trying to control the flood of illegal drugs into the United States.
• U.S. Border Czar - works on issues along the turbulent U.S.-Mexican border.
• Urban Czar - works on city issues
• Stimulus Accountability Czar - ensures the $787 billion in economic stimulus funds is spent properly.
• Iran Czar - seeks to improve U.S. relations with Iran and head off its nuclear ambitions.
• Energy Czar - has the global-warming portfolio.

These are just a few of the newly elected "czars."

So why is everyone upset about these czars?

The main issue here, is consitutionality. The problem with these so-called "czar" positions, is that the people elected to them, and their staff, are not accountable to Congress. This raises the issue, who are they held accountable to?

They fall directly under the executive branch, which means they answer to the president. Many people are worried that the creation of these "czar" positions gives the executive branch too much unchecked power.

Our country was founded on a system of checks and balances, which ensures that no one branch of government has too much power. It also ensures that if one branch does begin to overstep its boundaries, the other two branches of government can stop it.

Some people believe that these czars undermine this system of checks and balances, allowing the executive branch to control too much of the federal government without being accountable to the other two branches.

So what do you think? Are these czars unconstituional? Or simply a new means of distributing power, and responsibility? Will they be successful in their goals? Post your opinion, or ask more questions. I'd love to hear from you.

Check out my opinion at AmeriKad.

-Kaydee

Bibliography

"DeMint on Fox." 11 June 2009. Jim DeMint. 19 June 2009 <http://www.demint.senate.gov/>.

Lute, Douglas. "The Tin-Star Title." 20 May 2007. The New York Times. 19 June 2009 <http://www.americanthinker.com/>.

Myer, Bob. "Obama's Czars." 13 Nov. 2008. American Thinker. 19 June 2009 <http://www.americanthinker.com/>.

Will, George. "American Czars." 28 Dec. 2008. The Washington Post. 19 June 2009. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/>.