Consumer protection in financial peril that is an independent industry cannot be fired by the president it is not subject to the appropriations power as they are taking a number of actions that are outside of the public visibility for instance they are gathering financial records or creditcard records of hundreds of millions of americans with no discussion that than i could find and knows scrutiny or accountability for what these agencies are doing because you can see they are independent they are not part of the administration but on the other side you have the federal Communications Commission with neutrality it is widely reported in a cave out of the ftc and was directed by the president may be the president should direct the ftc but then there has to be some ownership of that. So there is a lot of examples of domestic overreach and not even owning that bennett hiding behind the various structures of bureaucratic independence which i think is quite troubling. I do think the problem is one for congress because that is the only place you could have the truly effective check. That is of great transition Congress People have promised they would keep president trumpery team didnt so what realistic can congress do . Who wants to take that . [laughter] walter. I think just on the notion of statutory claims it he says i will not comply with Congress Directs me to you do then that is at the heart of this. Congress can exercise the appropriation is authority if vice and Consumer Authority fighting whoever is the next president the senate should confirm all executive branch nominees for whatever party is. Because they agree with the president s policies i think congress has ample authority if they choose to exercise it trying to make mileage out of claims that a president when they have undertaken to enact legislation so were not in disagreement. I think it is under feet when people say dont worry about a candidate from because of the white House Counsel. [laughter] and i faked i would be more comfortable if i knew who the attorney general would be in making judgments. It is very hard for congress to have these significant power they have all the big powers but if the Congress Wants to Say Something about immigration they cannot place constraints or both houses of congress overruling the department of labour relationship and that is the prerogative but it is very hard to congress for congress to take back so the solution should not be running to court it has weakened the institution when they seek legal redress getting back to the question that we didnt have enough time to insert but yes, yes they might be able to do so but congress through the confirmation it has to wills said its to spousal they are soft waves of insolence better quite profound. Which is unjust the critics of the Obama Administration to do whatever they want it encourages bad to say that is right. So this idea that congress is dysfunctional and there is rhetoric from the things theyre actually doing the president do it didnt do anything for immigration they issued a directive because Copper Congress apprised him to do so not the president. Of course, he did it with the president s approval. There is nothing illegitimate about that but the rhetoric at the time is congress is an acting i have to take the law into my own hands and i understand why there is political pressure to do that but to take a paragraph out of the legal brief since congress will not legislate to exercise discretion discretion blob blob lot to provide or congress conferred upon and 86 to delay immigration. That is not what they do. The Public Discourse is not in terms of the boring Statutory Authority is. And i went cautioned the Democratic Administration to be a little more modest in the way they sell things and to explain they are not acting as the autocratic president. I will stay with you for the next question how do we think about the legal and moral defense ability of drone were fair with the enhanced interrogation techniques of president bush . We have an entire panel here devoted to that question and i think it is probably of mine. Online. This is live journalism. I dont have anything to add everyone in this audience is just as entitled as i am if they take it is immoral or not. So there are many legal questions a whole slew and drones in particular under statutory law isnt executive orders in terms of sovereignty in human rights the legal question does not reduce to a simple question i hope what has come now has been released demonstrate these are hard indelicate legal questions each of which insist upon its own assessment to the people will come to different views so that structural question may not be as important as the moral question but can you violate a statute . When you think it is in the best interest of the United States to do so . I think the answer really does matter is it the be all and end all just a question for the constitutional lawyers. I bet youre ghana say torture is still legal the matter what. And those who think that killing is the worst day and torture admits that. But one significant difference it is no exception whatsoever now there is more arguments under which some people force can be used and the forces the Obama Administration for starting in 2009 with the drone campaign, was contested to say it does matter if this is day then ship the part of what is remarkable is the rules have been contested but it is the conversation about the most elemental rules taking place among the elites with the places that our rich in the administrations were not claiming a basic authority. And the threat of a new normal to be put to an end there has been deep disappointment with respect to global wars but if you go to the legal arguments and even as the citizens are subjected to this claim to power the outcome is very much the same mib are left with this day Democratic Administration it is something quite extraordinary that is a bureaucratic infrastructure that has become entrenched that permits the use of lethal force based on internal interpretations of for based authority that could be cast aside with no review whatsoever. Jefferson powerball once you finish reading all of his books there is a new book out called targeting americans very subtle a nuanced thoughtful but the opening sentences on september 30th 2011 the executive period judge denies States Government deliberately killed citizens of the United States that sets it starkly but he is the first to say how difficult these questions are. One striking thing that i take issue with he is right to if we were to have a more robust public debate for the use of force the result may be more broad and aggressive and not only on the right to to say were wrong that the due process clause applies with the constitutional bill of rights does not apply a lot of people on the lefthand the right have said that i dont think it is right but similarly i feed it is a mistake to think the end of the Obama Administration is the same place at the end of the Bush Administration just like this strategy the he released as today or the day before it is back to the global war on terror and insist it is not only against al qaeda but all islamic terrorist of any kind but basically that we should use force the world over from developing the capabilities and there is a broad theory to keep them from the capabilities before a they struck there is a huge difference s. A. A practical matter from what the war powers thought to be in the authority said this may be the best youll ever get. But i am not saying thats paul reilly insisted is the same as the use of lethal force intervention but the legal interpretation and restrictions recognize there is so much that you could get to the same point when you think about transportation for those forces and i do think there is the real difference from what is authorized but in the terms of the policy debate to itt would have a more robust debate if there wasnt as much continue being secrecy. I think there is too much with those policy issues that may be helped by the release of the playbook i am somewhat skeptical but in our name under this policy people are killed and numbers rigidities have not been disclosed in domestically talking internationally, we dont have the results of investigations with respect to credible allegations the president had recognized and named the killing of a u. S. Citizens that they would receive the results of the investigation but have not done the same with the vast majority of people who were killed in these kinds of strikes and there is a real danger the public debate is not just skewed by i entirely inaccurate and that we as a public are deeply distanced from the realities on the ground from those are suggested to use policies. Next question. Near and dear to my heart, please comment on the increased use of president ial signing statements. [laughter] this goes to walter because he was head of the administration and then he approved of their use and of course, statement dash signing statements when he says the sections of this to statute the big controversy, the bush years until the second term rather Reagan Administration but it has picked up for those ideas they that they were not crazy. [laughter] all the a savage could take something as technical as a signing statement and turning into a journalistic issue. [laughter] first of all, the issue is it cannot be signing statements with the issue has to reread can the president declined to enforce an act of congress to be unconstitutional that he is signing into law. I understand that and i will come to that the when a president does that then he ought to tell people he is doing it and as soon as he signs the al lot. And now all i dont believe in the modern era that it is feasible to say the president s authority to apply with a constitution but his only choice was to veto the omnibus act with the kind of military pay because it and tell me he doesnt know or hast appointed special people larger small the president can say the supervision of this bill which could be construed common a few harvard directing the appropriations act you need to put the jerusalem a and israel on the passport. I have no trouble with that but i think this administration and any administration there is never one ever has or ever will step aside propositions with the authority to enforce laws and the Supreme Court has repeatedly authorize the presidency there for when he does it, the congress is acting whether theyre right to or wrong. But this. Respectful of your but that you should decline to enforce it. But i and directing were acknowledging the its three general and i do not believe that. Is best judgment. Couple but to have a single piece to say it is unconstitutional. There is always the provision with the omnibus bills would assure response . I think the modern practice where the president has a signing ceremony were people clapping he sues a statement to say by the way six of these is unconstitutional. Leased to veto the bill that they had no choice i understand their dilemma with the entire budget and on either hand if you are in congress there is very little downside weekend as you know, they will sign it anyway. With the dubious proposition proposition and from that static perspective to say if he doesnt sign the bill washington will come to its knees. But from a dynamic perspective there will be fewer bills of constitutional problems i will veto every bill. You do that once and then they get the message. Or he could call them into session. I agree. I dont believe he has to think they are unconstitutional but the issue is whether or not he could sign a bill. Were adding a time unfortunately. I am so sorry. And to now leading into the board of directors what do you think of the institution i believe the white House Counsel should be abolished. [laughter] you needed Ethics Officer is somebody to make contracts with the coast guard. And an interest to give the bill would vice it should come from the attorney general and they should get that for the office of Legal Counsel and the person whose advice he wanted those positions i will go up one more is somebody to help interpret these opinions. [laughter] basically we will hear someone who has served even know what should have been abolished. [laughter] [applause] mad as secretary we pledges 72 river delhi get to the next president of the devastates United States. [applause] the Inspector Generals report has alleged misconduct by a workers at the canaveral seashore. And that a House Oversight committee hearing. To our 20 minute hearing. [inaudible conversations] good morning the committee on oversight come together we can declare a recess said in the time for grieving hearing today about the oversight of the National Park service to represent the 100 years it was founded it should be a milestone but instead we find an agency increases. And the public is attending a in record demurs that we are still having problems and to provide recreational opportunities but the park system for the enjoyment education and inspiration for future generations that does not work with so many multiple cases of employee misconduct when it is distracted from its mission. No doubt those tens of thousands of people will have bad apples causing disruption in and heartachepropa of their not dealt with appropriately the problem becomes worse. The department of interiorghligt Inspector General highlights how the agency is failing and protect its employees in particular from Sexual Harassment. Ther warning sho is just another report or another part across the country Sexual Harassment of the river district was so bad that 13 victims directly with to the secretary of then interior but this is in going on for a decade forsu cowardice nonstop there. In the history of inappropriate behavior. And was also founder to make misleading statements that of a letter of reprimand was just days did enough methodeman of punishment. Then instead of firing is a repercussions the service was poorly managed and for over a decade they failed to meet the requirements claims could take years to process as they fail to maintain a program and then to finalize claims from whistleblowers to ziad this regard of the process to tolerate Sexual Harassment and then to hold management accountable for those transgressions and then to oversee the contract hopefully we will get into that as well. From the failures to maintain this ethical standards for overseeing the Ethics Program to its own ethical failures. A book don they failed to get the book deal and afterwards tried to cover his tracks when they follow the rules we cannot expect anybody at the agency turn a b something needs to change than it needs to change fast. We cannot turn a blind eye that the roads the faith in the government to destroyyhard w growl their hardworking and dedicated to working in a hostile environment manageresses they have their back and will take care of them is it creates a culture is cost dial in and should not be tolerated there are ethical problems and lack of plans to deal with the backlogs inconsistency of laws and rules are some of s the things that plague the park service and that is why we have the hearing today. I yield back the balance ofnd my time i recognize the balance of my time. Todays hearing involves a variety of allegations of the National Park service and unfortunately speeding several years plenty thank our witnesses for being here today the Deputy Inspector will be to issue many reports for example, the Inspector Generals office at the Denver Service center andat the improper use at yellowstone National Park. And as a result of the Inspector Generals work we also learned that he violated federal ethics it thro rules when he published a book about the departments Ethics Office even though he does not appear to have benefited financially he shows contempt for the ethics rules when he said hein would probably do the same thing again that is amazing. He would do it again. Because he always pushes the envelope. Said chairman talkedabout route and the confidence ofhing government and that kind of attitude is the very thingla that leads to low morale. And a lack of confidence. And as a result he has now been stripped of his authority at the National Park service and is undergoing mandatory ethics training himself right now. Most of the reports from the Inspector Generals office and this is very upsetting a long pattern of Sexual Harassment and paul style working violence at the grand canyon district the former superintendent received a report in 2013 documenting multipleine whetheru allegations but that report did not determine another investigation was warranted or should be pursued one year later 13 employs and allegations of their abusive behavior to the secretary of interior they refer these to the Inspector General and the office found 22 other individuals kodak reported experiencing a or witness a sexualharassment and hoss style Work Environment. They also found the previous reports of Sexual Harassments womack were not properly investigated orew reported in addition to the last few days the new report the pattern of