Originally Posted by
WillowRun 6-3
I'll just say, MechEngr, for now anyway, that if an observer focuses response to the oversight letter on the Chairman, Rep. Graves (I'm not on a first-name basis with Cabinet Secretaries or Members of Congress), without considering, (i) the letter bears the signature of the Ranking Member; (ii) 120 other Members inked it also; (iii) this letter was completed and in a manner which gained this quite evident bipartisan support and endorsement very quickly - despite the rancor and sideshow nonsense so popular in some precincts of the Congress - then it does seem that such an observer has some sort of bias unfavorably inclined toward the Chairman.
Is it your position, Mech (I guess I can start on this forum, acquiring first-name propers with people so knowledgeable about the ways and workings on Capitol Hill) that no oversight is called for? Unless your answer is an unequivocal "yes" - meaning you think nothing should emanate from the Committee in the nature of oversight - and since you obviously do not approve of the letter just issued, what would the oversight letter you would write, or approve and sign, say? I know I'm pressing attorney form here, so if you propose some different content as proper oversight, you can skip - omit - the footnotes in very neat Bluebook form.
It has become too common these days to let party affiliation or preference color an assessment, even when a bipartisan effort is made in good faith by members of Congress (in those rare cases that they do drop their cordons and agree on a position) where they wish to hold the Executive Branch to account. The attitude of "one drop of {party one dislikes} contaminates the whole gallon" is far too common.
Your post is well presented, and neutral in tone. Thanks for providing that kind of input.
How a bipartisan committee can lead an effort to idiot proof whatever it is that the FAA is doing remains to be seen ... given the number of idiots on Capitol Hill in the first place.
Less tongue in cheek: I applaud their efforts, in a bipartisan manner, to basically tell the Executive Branch "You can do better!"