Wall Street Weekly | 06/12/2009 12:55 pm

Obama’s Czars Play Russian Roulette With Business, by Liz Peek

At the end of the day, this country will be able to battle our growing list of issues only if our businesses prosper

By Liz Peek

Though the rate of decline in U.S. output is declining, and job losses are moderating, any recovery faces strong headwinds, as we have pointed out previously. A sharp jump in oil prices and mortgage rates that have risen to their highest level in seven months (now above 5.5% according to Freddie Mac) cramps two powerful boosts to stressed consumers. As budget deficits soar, this is not the time to add on a giant health-care program, for instance.

I sympathize with President’s Obama’s impatience. We really do need to restrict oil imports, we do need to fight paralyzing growth in medical outlays, we simply must dismantle the single biggest impediment to equality in this country – the bloated and ineffectual public education system – and it would be great to improve the quality of our air. The bad news is that we squandered decades of growth during which no single politician to my knowledge advocated a “rainy day” fund or used fast-growing revenues for vital infrastructure.

At the end of the day, this country will be able to battle our growing list of issues only if our businesses prosper. Commercial success leads to job growth and rising government revenues.

To date, this administration has seemed more interested in penalizing and correcting businesses than in inspiring growth and profitability. Oversight measures are abounding, big and small. Next week the Treasury is set to release its plan for financial regulatory reform, which was meant to simplify the tangled web of overseers now in place – a system that grew up piecemeal as the banking and trading sector grew in size and sophistication. The word is that instead of reducing the number of agencies, Treasury Secretary Geithner will propose two new ones. Why? Because the congressional committees that are charged with monitoring these organizations refuse to give up power. I have to laugh.

This week the Obama administration installed a Pay Czar. Some are saying that this country has now produced more czars than the Romanoffs. We have a car czar, energy czar, border czar, drug czar – as many as 21 in all! I don’t know about you, but I’m actually uncomfortable that our country is now being run by czars – it didn’t turn out well for Russia, and I doubt that it will for the U.S. either.

161 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Diamond, “czar” is an unofficial reference that has been in use since the early Reagan era. Who are these 21 people you refer to and what are their official positions?

By ZeraLee on 06/16/2009 12:44 am

e-mail alert

The so-called “czars” are nothing like political officers. They focus on the success of a particular policy, not the ideology or “loyalty” of individuals. If you want political officers, talk to Michele Bachmann. She’s already expressed interest in that sort of thing.

The term was coined back in ‘82, under Reagan. These appointments by Obama are not new to government, and do not represent a new change in the structure of government.

The checks and balances went out with Bush43. Obama44 has been bringing them back.

By ZeraLee on 06/19/2009 12:59 am

e-mail alert

The checks and balances are our congress and our senate - not people ‘appointed’ by the President to deal with issues of concern to this country. If it is to push his own agenda then he is circumventing our constitutional system and would not be legal. If it is to push his own agenda then the money to pay these people had better be coming out of the Democrat party and not the public trough.

By canuckcanuck on 07/09/2009 7:18 am

e-mail alert

The “czars” do not set policy or evangelize ideology, they implement policies set through normal channels. It may be a good idea to have advise-and-consent on some of the more sensitive positions, but I think that is up to the Legislative Branch, not the Executive.

Advice and Consent of the Senate is not the only system of checks and balances we have, but Bush43 demonstrated how all of them can be circumvented - with widespread support from the GOP.

By ZeraLee on 07/10/2009 1:04 pm

e-mail alert

…. hold it … hold it …. counting Repubs …. k …. all on board ….. counting Dems …. WOW - ALL ON BOARD TOO AFTER 911 ….. counting again ….. yep …. SAME NUMBER! Maybe they were all in a trance or something and did not know what they were supporting …. musta been the koolaid ….

By canuckcanuck on 07/10/2009 1:53 pm

e-mail alert

Silly me…I thought it was Business playing Russian Roulette with Business these many years…thus that’s how we got into this ditch…and all the time it’s Obama’s fault…gosh what would we do without ole Lizzie Peak to s’plain it all to us?

By VictoriaJ on 06/14/2009 6:04 pm

e-mail alert

Liz, I would like to know if you have an opinion about the Economist Peter Schiff. Frankly his ideas sound a lot like your ideas taken to the next level.

I would appreciate your opinion

By CYNTHIANEIL on 06/16/2009 11:39 pm

e-mail alert

To date there are 33 Czars and counting

- Jack Kingston (R) has been trying to bring concerns about this to the congressional floor but Pelosi and Reid are blocking him every time. It is determined that each of these unvetted appointments by Obama are making at least $170,000 a year (do the math - 33 x $170,000) - these are not elected officials but appointed by Obama and they are circumventing congress and the senate as they answer to no one. Each is also thought to have a staff of perhaps 10 other people. Again - elected by no one but appear to have great power in our government. HOW??? They are doing paraell work to the congress and senate but HOW??? WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE AND WHY DO THEY HAVE A SAY IN WHAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR GOVERNMENT??? WHY ARE WE AS AMERICANS STANDING BACK AND SAYING NOTHING ABOUT A GOVERNMENT THAT IS CIRCUMVENTING OUR LEGAL ELECTORAL PROCESS, THAT IS NOT LISTENING TO A THING WE SAY AND IS NOT READING BILLS THEY ARE PASSING COSTING US TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS?

MORE MONEY HAS GONE TO ACORN - WHY? This organization is under criminal investigation yet they are still getting huge grants from our government. They will also be involved in the census taking process and it has been found out that this is a corrupt organization.

WHAT IS GOING ON IN WASHINGTON? and now there is talk of a second stimulous bill when the first one has not worked???

Common sense tells this American that we are headed for big, big trouble if we do not start standing up and screaming to our reps to stop the madness …

By canuckcanuck on 07/09/2009 7:11 am

e-mail alert

I repeat, …Don’t hold back. Give names and specifics.

Tell again. I missed what you have against the NIH czar appointment, Homeland Security czar, border czar, etc. What was that again? Circumventing how?

By MaggieW on 07/10/2009 2:48 pm

e-mail alert

Obama Science Czar Wrote Book Supporting Forced Abortions, Mass Sterilization And A World Government Obama has worked long and hard to distance himself from extremists in his past such as Rev. Jermiah “Them Jews” Wright and William Ayers. And, to some extent, he’s managed to convince the public at large (with no small amount of help from his friends in the media) that his associations with these people in his past were trivial and inconsequential.

But how about someone he’s picked to actually serve in his administration? It turns out that John Holdren, Obama’s “Science Czar,” once wrote a book supporting things such as mass sterilization and forced abortions. Things even staunch members of the liberal Democrat base would probably find objectionable and radical.

Forced abortions. Mass sterilization. A “Planetary Regime” with the power of life and death over American citizens.

The tyrannical fantasies of a madman? Or merely the opinions of the person now in control of science policy in the United States? Or both?

These ideas (among many other equally horrifying recommendations) were put forth by John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology—informally known as the United States’ Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who “contribute to social deterioration” (i.e. undesirables) “can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility”—in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational “Planetary Regime” should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans’ lives—using an armed international police force.

Impossible, you say? That must be an exaggeration or a hoax. No one in their right mind would say such things.

Well, I hate to break the news to you, but it is no hoax, no exaggeration. John Holdren really did say those things, and this report contains the proof. Below you will find photographs, scans, and transcriptions of pages in the book Ecoscience, co-authored in 1977 by John Holdren and his close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich.

It’d be nice if, in the coming days, someone could ask Obama if he agrees with Dr. Holdren on these issues. The backpedaling and evasions sure to be amusing.

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama_science_czar_wrote_book_supporting_forced_abortions_mass_sterilizatio/

By canuckcanuck on 07/11/2009 1:31 am