Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Our Hoosier Board! Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions. Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful. Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine! Cheers, sirbrianwilson Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Director of DHS a political position; Good or bas idea...discuss | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 30 2013, 03:46 PM (30 Views) | |
| IUCOLTFAN | Aug 30 2013, 03:46 PM Post #1 |
|
Coach
|
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/30/new-boss-at-ice-ineligible-for-job-says-critic/ When John Sandweg, a former Arizona criminal defense attorney and associate of outgoing Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, was named acting director of ICE, several critics questioned his credentials. Some told FoxNews.com his appointment seemed to be political, and others said the agency needed a leader who had come up through the ranks. “Given that there are literally dozens of people within ICE who have more experience in management/law enforcement and meet these qualifications, there is no excuse for placing Mr. Sandweg as acting director of ICE,” said Anthony Ho, who was assistant special agent in charge of ICE’s San Francisco division before retiring in December. Ho noted that the 2002 law which established the agency, then known as Bureau of Border Security, explicitly requires that the director “shall have a minimum of 5 years professional experience in law enforcement, and a minimum of 5 years of management experience.” The law was designed specifically to prevent the agency from becoming politicized, Ho said. It was not clear if the same requirements apply to an acting director, but one source told FoxNews.com it was likely the intent that they would, otherwise an acting director could be installed indefinitely simply to get around them. Should he be nominated for the full-time job and would the Senate even consider confirming him? |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Aug 30 2013, 05:59 PM Post #2 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
I don't know the rule, but does confirmation have to come from both the house and senate or just the senate? |
| |
![]() |
|
| IUCOLTFAN | Aug 31 2013, 07:38 AM Post #3 |
|
Coach
|
It's always called "Senate confirmation", I'm pretty sure it's just the Senate. |
![]() | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Aug 31 2013, 10:07 AM Post #4 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
Okay, just curious as if it had Togo through both then both parties would have to agree. Anyway, the opinion that an appointment would be political isn't exactly new. However, if the person doesn't meet the written requirements then I would say they shouldn't qualify for the position. |
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:54 PM Jul 10
|








7:54 PM Jul 10