President Bush this month issued his first signing statement since the Democratic takeover of Congress, reserving the right to bypass 11 provisions in a military appropriations bill under his executive powers.<\/p>\n
In the statement, which the White House filed in the Federal Register on Nov. 13 but which initially attracted little attention, Bush challenged several requirements to provide information to Congress.<\/p>\n
For example, one law Bush targeted requires him to give oversight committees notice before transferring US military equipment to United Nations peacekeepers.<\/p>\n
Bush also challenged a new law that limits his ability to transfer funds lawmakers approved for one purpose to start a different program, as well as a law requiring him to keep in place an existing command structure for the Navy’s Pacific fleet.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Bush thought enough of the bill to sign it into law, but not quite enough of it to obey the bill’s provisions. He’s picky that way.
\n
\nSavage suggests Bush was almost restrained this time around.<\/p>\n
By referring only to objections voiced in past documents, Bush’s new signing statement struck a less aggressive tone than those he issued during the years when his own party controlled Congress.<\/p>\n
In the past, Bush’s assertion that he could bypass laws was backed by the invocation of broad theories laying out the scope of a president’s power to defy congressional statutes.<\/p>\n
In a further sign that the White House adopted a muted tone, the new signing statement also said nothing about two higher-profile provisions in the bill that limit presidential power: One law prohibits the military from using foreign intelligence information that was collected illegally, and the other forbids expending funds to establish permanent US military bases in Iraq.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Bush only said he’d blow off some<\/i> of the provisions he doesn’t like. I guess that’s progress.<\/p>\n
Asked if the White House intentionally was toning down the attitude, spokesman Tony Fratto said shorter signing statements are “just easier.”<\/p>\n
If there’s one thing these guys value, it’s convenience.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Throughout his first six years in office, Bush had a habit of signing congressional legislation into law, but using “signing statements” to explain which parts of the law he didn’t feel like following. Fortunately, the president curtailed the practice this year, sticking with the more traditional sign-or-veto approach embraced by his predecessors. That is, until […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[617],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13780","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13780","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13780"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13780\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13780"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13780"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/stevebenen.com\/thecarpetbaggerreport\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13780"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}