"Signing Statements"
Jul. 26th, 2006 10:24 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jducoeurTerribly interesting segment on NPR right now (on "On Point", repeated at 7pm tonight).
Everyone's been making a big deal about Bush finally giving the first veto of his six years in office; there's often been an implicit tone of, "Look how reasonable he is, and how well he works with Congress". But very little attention has been paid to his practice of using "signing statements". Basically, when he signs a bill into law, he attaches a rider saying how the Administration will interpret the law, which sometimes subverts the intent of that law or even amounts to saying that they will largely ignore it.
Well, the American Bar Association has just released study of these things, and it's pretty appalling. Turns out that Bush has issued something like 800 of them -- more than all other Presidents combined. So much for reasonable. Even the more responsible Republicans in Congress are getting worried by this subtle power-grab, and are mulling legislation to at least force some discipline on the practice, and maybe give Congress the power to sue the Presidency over it. Suddenly there's a new constitutional crisis looming, which has been building quietly for years...
Everyone's been making a big deal about Bush finally giving the first veto of his six years in office; there's often been an implicit tone of, "Look how reasonable he is, and how well he works with Congress". But very little attention has been paid to his practice of using "signing statements". Basically, when he signs a bill into law, he attaches a rider saying how the Administration will interpret the law, which sometimes subverts the intent of that law or even amounts to saying that they will largely ignore it.
Well, the American Bar Association has just released study of these things, and it's pretty appalling. Turns out that Bush has issued something like 800 of them -- more than all other Presidents combined. So much for reasonable. Even the more responsible Republicans in Congress are getting worried by this subtle power-grab, and are mulling legislation to at least force some discipline on the practice, and maybe give Congress the power to sue the Presidency over it. Suddenly there's a new constitutional crisis looming, which has been building quietly for years...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-26 08:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-27 02:05 am (UTC)Besides, if things continue to get worse, moving to another country is no sort of solution. A true American Empire is a danger to *everyone*. America working in conjunction with the rest of the world can be a great force for good; bestriding it, a source of potential horror.
And it's not as if anywhere is a panacea. England and Italy are both showing their own signs of resurgent authoritarianism, and most of Europe has flirted with it sometime in the past two decades. This is an ongoing fight, that has to be dealt with, rather than escaped.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-27 02:15 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-27 03:19 am (UTC)Care to tell me who you are and how you found me? I'm just about ready to assume you're actually