What do you think of when you hear the term “czar?” Often times, it’s associated with Russia. Many consider it a negative term or at the least, another appointed official by the president. Are czars legal? What do you think?

FAR Editor

Wikipedia defines Czar as:

Like many lofty titles (e.g. Mogul) “tsar” or “czar” is used as a term for positions of high authority in English societies.

In the United States the title “czar” is an informal term for certain high-level officials, such as the “drug czar” for the head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, “terrorism czar” for a Presidential advisor on terrorism policy, “cybersecurity czar” for the highest-ranking Department of Homeland Security official on computer security and information security policy, and “war czar” to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. (For additional referencing, click on the link.)

American Czars are little caesars or What the what?
By Deborah Young

“I did not like the appointing of Czars under GW and I don’t like it any better under BHO.

It’s taken President Obama only 3 months to name as many Czars to run America as it took the Russian Romanov’s in Russia. Only it took them 300 years to name 18 czars. And it didn’t end well.

So far, Pres. Obama has named 18 Czars and there are more to come. Richard Nixon was the first American president to name a Czar: William E. Simon, to handle the 1970’s energy crisis.” (Click on the link for additional information.)

Obama’s radical, anti-American czars:
By Joseph Farah

Among Barack Obama’s 34 unaccountable “czars” are at least two whose radical roots and extremist views should disqualify them from service in government at any level – let alone as top advisers to the president.

But, then again, this is the Obama administration – one headed by a former “community organizer” for ACORN, the fraudulent, law-breaking street thugs determined to undermine the rule of law and the will of the people. (Click on the link for additional information)

Obama’s Czars
By Bob Myer

Suddenly a rash of czars is in prospect for the Obama Administration.

The title “czar” in the executive branch has some history.  The “drug czar” title  appeared during the Reagan administration.  The term has always seemed a little strange to me, but that’s probably because the word has a negative connotation in my opinion; an all-powerful, micro-managing type of connotation.  What’s more, after spending a little time participating in the “war on drugs”, it seemed that the czar’s effort was futile and cost a lot of money. (Click on link for additional information.)

Long live the Czars!
By Ethel C. Fenig – American Thinker

As previously noted,,  the only segment of our economy that is not contracting, where employees do not live in fear of being laid off, is government. This holds true at all levels of government including the federal level.

A particularly historic federal expansion has been for czars; those advisers, directors or what have you who set policy but don’t even require Senate confirmation. Politico has posted a list of 31 of President Barack Obama’s (D) czars and czarinas. Among the more obscure or head scratching are:

AIDS Czar: Jeffrey Crowley , Domestic Violence Czar: Lynn Rosenthal, Faith-Based Czar: Joshua DuBois, Great Lakes Czar: Cameron Davis, Sudan Czar: J. Scott Gration, Terrorism Czar: John Brennan.

Of course these areas are important but czar status? With how many thousands of sub czars reporting to the master czar? And really, while multiculturalism is great, certainly there must be a better term for these overseers than czar.Then again, maybe not. After all they make policy with little oversight or input from their constituents, the employer does minimal background checks, their word is law and woe to anyone who breaks the law.

Ok, czar it is.

Additional Link:

Townhall.com