Gumby
05-10-2006, 11:41 PM
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2006/05/10/bush_vs_congress/
Bush vs. Congress
May 10, 2006
THE CHAIRMAN of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republican Arlen Specter, wants to force the Bush administration to explain and defend the president's practice of quietly declaring he will not obey laws passed by Congress. The public first became aware of this when Bush appended a ''signing statement" to the anti-torture amendment of Senator John McCain.
The full extent of the president's attempt to create stealth vetoes became evident when the Globe's Charlie Savage reported April 30 that Bush had used this technique to exempt himself from the reach of more than 750 laws, far more than any previous president. Specter's hearing next month will be most useful if it goes beyond an investigation of this practice and points the way to a reassertion of Congress's truncated authority.
Specter's statements when he announced the hearing show that he, at least, knows the stakes. Calling the signing statements a ''very blatant encroachment" on the powers reserved to Congress by the Constitution, Specter said, ''There may as well soon not be a Congress . . . And I think that most members don't understand what's happening."
What's happening is that a president who prides himself on being the first in modern times to go so long without vetoing a bill has found a way to reject legislation that restricts executive branch authority in ways he doesn't like. Beyond reserving the right to set aside the anti-torture law, Bush has used signing statements to nullify rules and regulations for the military, affirmative-action requirements, safeguards against political interference in federally funded research, limits on the use of US troops in Colombia, and protections for whistle-blowers who tell Congress about alleged government wrongdoing.
Bush vs. Congress
May 10, 2006
THE CHAIRMAN of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Republican Arlen Specter, wants to force the Bush administration to explain and defend the president's practice of quietly declaring he will not obey laws passed by Congress. The public first became aware of this when Bush appended a ''signing statement" to the anti-torture amendment of Senator John McCain.
The full extent of the president's attempt to create stealth vetoes became evident when the Globe's Charlie Savage reported April 30 that Bush had used this technique to exempt himself from the reach of more than 750 laws, far more than any previous president. Specter's hearing next month will be most useful if it goes beyond an investigation of this practice and points the way to a reassertion of Congress's truncated authority.
Specter's statements when he announced the hearing show that he, at least, knows the stakes. Calling the signing statements a ''very blatant encroachment" on the powers reserved to Congress by the Constitution, Specter said, ''There may as well soon not be a Congress . . . And I think that most members don't understand what's happening."
What's happening is that a president who prides himself on being the first in modern times to go so long without vetoing a bill has found a way to reject legislation that restricts executive branch authority in ways he doesn't like. Beyond reserving the right to set aside the anti-torture law, Bush has used signing statements to nullify rules and regulations for the military, affirmative-action requirements, safeguards against political interference in federally funded research, limits on the use of US troops in Colombia, and protections for whistle-blowers who tell Congress about alleged government wrongdoing.