So anyone will do, as long as they TAKE the powers you want to hand them. Funny, since my understanding of the Constitution says congress has to delagate them that powers.
I agree there is a problem of enforcement, and that obama is likely not elliable. But congress is who needs to assign this authority to another agency, or take it up themselves., or the courts.
But we have enough agencies taking and using powers they weren’t given by law. That isn’t a republic, that’s tyrany and a dictatorship by committee.
In my jobs I have often found that “process” gets in the way of “production” and failures are rampant, when “process” is put first and foremost.
In business, production must come first, process is only a tool to get better product.
Likewise, in a well-functioning society, each person and each institution — civic groups, businesses, schools, clubs, governments, bureaucracies, courts, crews of workers, etc. — must put productive and socially harmonious habits, actions, mores and ethos first, before dry “process”.
There is always a over and under in action according to one’s duty. If one is not doing more on some occasion than strict permit may allow, then one is certainly doing less than is one’s true duty, one is a slacker. Such under-performers will — in an watchdog regulatory agency like an FEC — come to allow destructive forces and harms to occur by inaction.
THAT TYPE OF BUREAUCRATIC INACTION IS VERY EUROPEAN! IT IS PERVASIVE IN LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES! It results in long lines and insufferable delays to get anything done, even the most trivial. It is not American.
It enables great tyrannies to arise, and blocks many channels that otherwise would avail to stop them. Viz Germany in the 1930’s.
In AMERICA, in any nation committed to ideals, every person in a bureaucracy and agency still has a citizen’s duty to uphold the law, and in ideal, to perform those duties and needed actions that the agency or bureau just by its very existence comes by law, habit or general perception of scope of authority to preclude others from doing. That’s called picking up the load.
By doing SOMETHING, by making a decision or taking an action with actual serious consequences, the bureau or agency provides a public measure of it’s justification. We, the public, can then decide to keep it, cut it, chop it down to some size, or grow it. By making non-consequential decisions such as the FEC just did, they dilute and obfuscate accountability, for themselves and for that which they “acted”. That’s wrong. That’s immoral.
The big struggle in life and duty is to keep those excursions around the limits of one’s duty all for the good. Even in exception one strives to be moral and ethical.