The politicans look like they have tried to do something about CFR when really all they have done is come away with the ceiling raised on hard money, alot of lawyers make money and a name for themselves, and politicians get to roll back legislation, that was like pulling teeth to get passed in the first place, when the limits were first enacted.
I can think of no better example of congressional/executive/judicial "sausage-making".
Try this perspective: A somewhat high-profile case that is sure to get substantial media attention(especially with all the howling and moaning that will go on after it is ruled unconstitutional), where Bush compromised with the Dems and is now defending something he isn't 100% happy with. The key sentence to me was about Ashcroft assuring that the Administration would defend the law. Sounds reminiscent of the confirmation hearings regarding if he would defend abortion laws. So by signing the bill and taking the position of defending it(with Ashcroft high-profile), this will be a visible display to the public that Bush and Ashcroft will enforce the laws(sadly ironic, eh?) irregardless of his personal views. Attempts to gain the trust of pro-abortion soccer moms in the Northeastern suburbs, defuses some of the 'evil' stereotype of his conservative appointments, yet low-risk in that the USSC will likely rule the worst parts unconstitutional.
Could this be part of the administration's thinking?