Still waiting: With the Consent of the Governed

Despite months of growing doubts about the direction of this administration, rejection of its policies in polls and at the polls the fundamental objection by many to all of the Obama policies is only partly content based. More accurately the objections relate to the method of adoption, without the apparent consent of the governed.The recent appointment of special advisor Elizabeth Warren (shown with President Obama in the accompanying AP photo) to guide the establishment of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection is the latest example. Like all of the previously appointed czars, the president made the appointment without sending it through the Senate. The Washington Post opined, "For all intents and purposes, the president has created, and filled, a de facto directorship. This might have been in keeping with the letter of the laws, but not with their spirit."

The Washington Post's editorial also identified Ms. Warren as a 'progressive.' A key tenet of that philosophy is disdain for the consent of the governed. The Heritage Foundation's The Foundry blog has a particularly salient post about that today.

Which leaves us to consider that not only the governed feel their consent is not needed, but those governing do not as well. The voters may decide to reassert their position as best they can on November 2nd. Both the president and congress would do well to take heed.