Posted on 06/21/2006 9:01:43 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration will have to explain why it thinks it can ignore or overrule laws passed by Congress in a hearing next week, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter said on Wednesday.
Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said he hoped to force the Bush administration to reduce its use of "signing statements" -- memos that reserve the right to ignore laws if the president thinks they impinge on his authority.
"Our legislation doesn't amount to anything if the president can say, 'My constitutional authority supersedes the statute.' And I think we've got to lay down the gauntlet and challenge him on it," Specter said in a telephone interview.
A Justice Department official is scheduled to testify at a hearing on signing statements next Tuesday, Specter said.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who had lunch with Specter on Wednesday, will face questions about the presidential memos when he appears before the committee on July 18 to discuss the National Security Agency's domestic spying program.
Bush has signed at least 750 such memos since taking office in 2001, according to the Boston Globe, more than previous presidential administrations combined.
Bush has used signing statements to signal that he might bypass a ban on the torture of U.S.-held prisoners and ignore new provisions in an anti-terrorism law that call for increased congressional oversight.
Specter said the heavy use of signing statements fits in with a larger pattern of overreaching by the Bush administration, from the NSA's surveillance program to a first-ever raid on a congressman's office as part of a bribery probe.
Trying to legislate against signing statements probably would not work, Specter said, but there might be other ways to force the administration to curb their use.
"Maybe we can find some pressure point on the budget or appropriations or confirmations or something of that sort," he said. "I'm thinking about all the alternatives."
A White House official said signing statements help the public understand how a given law will be enforced and can provide guidance to courts as they interpret it.
"They are used appropriately and the content is consistent with that of past presidents," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.
Specter has clashed with the White House in recent months about the spying program and recently accused Vice President Dick Cheney of meddling in his committee's affairs.
Specter has been trying to reach a compromise with Cheney and other officials on legislation that would allow a special court to review the surveillance program.
"We've made some progress on it but I'm not prepared to give you the details," he said. "This is a major matter for them that they have not yet finished."
Explain to me again why the Bush admin back Spector over Toomey?
This from the fruitcake that relies upon Scottish law...
Wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that about 90% of what comes out of the congress is unconstitutional?
Ah geez, will someone please tell him to put a sox in it.
Go ahead and challenge to your black RINO's heart's content, Arlen... You'll lose.
If Congress wants to amend the Constitution, it knows how to do it. Passing a statute isn't enough.
We don't have a congressional dictatorship in this country even if 75 Senators wish it were so.
Oh, please, Senator. You started meddling in their affairs first.
Isn't it the Presidents job to do this? Or did I miss something?
To think that Specter believes that whatever he says goes...
Sounds to me like he needs to read up on Constitutional law a little more...
- plewis1250
Then Bush should have the cajones to veto the legislation, rather than sign it into law and simply chose not to follow it.
Yeah. What's up with that anyway?
Spincter hasn't had a clue since that day long ago when he dreamed up the "Magic Bullet".
The man is a nut.
Except that Specter doesn't control budget or appropriations, and can be cowed on confirmations by Orrin Hatch and John Kyl.
There are no pressure points, Arlen. And you seem to be the only one who's got his BVDs bunched up over these signing statements.
Appears as tho the President has given himself the authority to use the line item veto...
As much as I disagree with Arlen on most everything, I think he's on the right track with this one...
"Spincter hasn't had a clue since that day long ago when he dreamed up the "Magic Bullet"."
I think he is one of the few surving participants of the Warren Commission. Except of course for Gerald Ford, the only non-elected President of the United States.
Can anyone here spell P-A-Y-B-A-C-K?
"Sign your name. Make a law. Neat."
--- President Bill Clinton on executive orders
You got it Brad. This is exactly what the Admin.
has been trying to do. Too bad there are RINO's
in the senate who have no clue what grass roots
Republicans are all about.
Mahalo for your post.
Obviously with Spincter, we have a Republican the left can adore.
Quite Frankly this could escalate into a Constitutional amendment. And the big question we have to ask ourselves is, even if we approve of the use of signing statements, to ignore laws passed by Congress, by Bush, how would we view the use of signing statements by the next President? Can anybody say Hillary? If she became President, she would point to precedent set by Bush, and who knows what she would do! Her ambition,a nd lust for power are limitless.
So keep that in mind when rubber-stamping the use of these signing statements.
The point remains: Both served on the Warren Commission and both reaped unexpected rewards.
IIRC, Specter also represented some notorious murder "suspect" that was apprehended overseas. I think the guy actually ended up serving time.
Apparently he doesn't learn from history. He is doing the same thing in Utah...
Here's my "recipe" contribution:(that I posted once before)
Arizona Yellow Belly Rino Sandwiches
Ingredients needed : One Arizona Yellow Belly Rino (washed completely until clean with Rio Grande water ONLY), flour tortillas, and taco sauce.
Utensils needed : US Army issue flame thrower, woodchipper, cement mixer, 4 x 8 ft folding table, paper plates, paper towels, and a cash box with $100 in mixed bills and change (this will be explained later in the directions)
Directions: Since the head of an Arizona Yellow Belly Rino is EXTREMELY large, and will IN NO WAY fit into a normal or commercial size oven, use the flamethrower to cook the AZ YB Rino until fork tender and it no longer emits any sounds or gas.
Tip the cement mixer 45 degrees from it's straight up position. Next, move and place the woodchipper's discharge so it is aiming DIRECTLY into the opening of the cement mixer.
With the woodchipper running, insert the AZ YB Rino into the intake of the woodchipper.(When the head goes in, it WILL strain the chipper due to it's EXTREME hardness, so do the head SLOWLY,.The head interior is empty so it won't take long at a slow speed)
When the chipper is finished, start the cement mixer and add the taco sauce until mixed. You are almost ready to start serving !!!
Next,using a vechicle with a trailer hitch, move the cement mixer and other utensils to the nearest non-fenced US area of the US-Mexican Border. Set up the table, and place the paper towels, plates, and cash box on the table.
When you start seeing people coming from the south toward you heading north, those people will probably be a little hungry. Offer them each an Arizona Yellow Belly Sandwich, at a price to be determined by you. Make change from your cash box if needed.
When you have sold all your Arizona Yellow Belly Sandwices, that money should cover the cost of the rental of the woodchipper, flamethrower, cement mixer, towing hitch, folding table, paper plates and towels, gasoline for your vehicle, and leave you with a nice profit for your labor. And if you are tired after all your hard work, you can take part of the profits, and offer to pay some of your customers to help you with the "clean-up".
Be sure that you buy the cash box outright. Do not rent the cash box as you will be able to use it again when you make your next batch of Arizona Yellow Belly Rino Sandwiches!!
Enjoy!!!
He never aspired to greatness, but he did his best during trying times. I remember him fondly.
As for Spincter, I have always seen him as nothing more than a cheap suit.
But I think you're right, the other Warren Commission members are all dead.
Yeah, the constitution is pesky in that way. Imagine...it doesn't allow Congress do everything it desire.
And I think we've got to lay down the gauntlet and challenge him on it," Specter said in a telephone interview.
Okay, so does this mean he's taking the issue to the Supremes to rule upon?
Trying to legislate against signing statements probably would not work, Specter said
Oops. Guess not, apparently he doesn't think he'd win on constitutional grounds. Even with kennedy as the deciding voice. So what does he resort to?
"Maybe we can find some pressure point on the budget or appropriations or confirmations or something of that sort," he said. "I'm thinking about all the alternatives."
Blackmail.
And, funny he mentions confirmations. Is he implying JUDICIAL confirmations? As in, the reason he was supposed to be supported over Toomey? As in the nominations he has been stalling to move forward on?
Last I checked while RINO's like McCain and Linds are not happy, they've let this go. At least publicly, though I'm sure they are heavily involved behind the scenes in "compromise" legislation hinted at in this article. They are more focused publicly on preventing torturing ofterrorists, shoving other unpopular bills down our throat and blocking a judge Lind's lawyer friends don't like.
That leaves only two Republicans seemingly still publicly out of joint on this. Hagel and Specter. Hagel's out of sort on anything that involves common sense in winning this war, no surprise there. What bothers Specter? It's the fact he perceives a challenge to his supreme, in his own mind, authority AND the fact his pals on the left in the Senate are insiuating he's become Bush's puppet. So he thinks he'll take the opportunity to show he's boss even though the rest of the country thinks he's out of his mind on this issue.
Specter needs to shut up and sit down.
and munch some poop.
There, I said it.
I've never understood what is so implausible about the Single Bullet Theory (which is describing only ONE of the sets of wounds rather than all of them, as many people who use "magic bullet" incorrectly attribute to the theory). A bullet passing through one person's neck and hitting another guy after it passes is not exactly impossible.
However, you are right, on many things, Specter is nuts. Actually, he just likes press attention. He'll take it whether it is positive or negative, just as long as it is in high quantities. The way to get him back on our side would be to come up with a way for him to get more headlines by taking a different treck.
The WH needs to sign one more statement...
The requirement for Trying-to-make-a-Spectacle to wear duct tape at all times...
But plausible?
I'm of the opinion that Kennedy was shot from behind, by an AR-15, a rare prototype in that time, but shot by accident, I speak of the head shot, and the weapon was only available in that day and time to the Secret Service.
You sound a bit more reasonable than some. I have had arguments with people on here and elsewhere before arguing that the commission concluded every wound occurred from one bullet.
That's the way the constitution is written. It's called the balance of powers, not follow any law we pass.
"Sign your name. Make a law. Neat."
--- President Bill Clinton on executive orders
Despite my extreme dislike for that guy and his presidency, I think it's important that the use of quotation marks is restricted to actual quotes, not just thrown in where they might seem appropriate. I don't believe Clinton ever said any such thing. When there is no regard to accuracy, things like this are eventually accepted as truth or it's very easy to dispel them. In either case, it just makes a muddle of facts and fiction.
I'm guessing that you're referring to this:
'Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool'
I didn't use double quotes, because I'm not 100% certain of the verbiage or the source, but I believe it was Paul Begala who said that.
Out of a profound ignorance as to what a complete piece of human feces Specter is, and always has been.
I suggest Arliss should take his case to the Supreme Court; I suspect that the President is correct in taking the position that he has taken.
It is attributed to Paul Begala.
Bush helping the back stabbing Specter get re-elected reminds me of the old saying that, "no good deed goes unpunished."
If President Bush is correct then we no longer have a republican form of government. Under our constitutional system all legislative authority is vested in the people which they exercise through their elected representatives in Congress. This is the core of democratic self-governance and if the executive may pick and choose which laws, or even which part of a law, he wants to implement then we no longer have self-government we have a system of arbitrary law or what our founders called a tyranny.
Our founders realized that there would always be the tendency for the ruling elite to infringe on the rights of the people to govern themselves and warned us that the preservation of our liberties required a vigilant citizenry. Our first responsibility as citizens is to demand that our elected officials respect and preserve our republican form of government. These signing statements are not the only form of executive usurpation of the legislative authority of the people. The growing use of executive orders amounts to government by executive fiat and the selective refusal to enforce existing law, as in the case of illegal immigration, is a refusal on the part of the President to bow to the will of the people as is his duty under our republican system.
Congress is complicit in surrendering the legislative authority of the people to the executive branch because they do not want the responsibility or the accountability for difficult decisions. They would rather abdicate their responsibilities and then criticize the executive for whatever happens as a result of Presidential actions. I cannot remember a time when I agreed with Spector but he is right to be concerned about this issue. The American people should be very concerned too if they wish to preserve their right to govern themselves.
I think the latter. They are all hat; no cattle.
I believe a few have but not nearly enough. Congress is the problem since they have consistently refused to perform their "balancing" function. Ultimately, however, in a self-governing society "the people" always have the power to hold their elected officials, as well as the judiciary, accountable to republican principles. With a two year election cycle the House of Representatives is especially susceptible to public opinion. Unless and until elections are done away with or rendered meaningless through corruption we still have the power to reassert the legislative authority of the people. The question is do we have the will?
Link: Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney Wants State Troopers to Arrest Illegals.
When the governor of a state has to get permission from the federal government before he can order state police to enforce laws on the books, you know America is down the tubes.Mitt Romney wants the feds to OK his plan for Massachusetts state police officers to have the authority to arrest illegal immigrants solely on their immigration status.
It is difficult to disagree with your post; however, isn't it possible that Congress passes laws that infringe on the powers instilled in the presidency?
If it is such a big issue, then the Supreme Court must eventually get involved and resolve the issue, no?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.