Signing Statements under Obama

[del]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

 

[Annie]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

Could be. Then again, he said no earmarks. Revised today to next year. Then he also said, out of Iraq in 13 months. Whoops, the 16 Bush said, and leave at least 50k behind, but he'll rename them.

 

[Ravi]

I thought McCain said no earmarks and Obama said he'd make sure they were kosher.

Del, me hopes so, too.

 

[manu1959]

I thought McCain said no earmarks and Obama said he'd make sure they were kosher.

Del, me hopes so, too.

as the old saying goes.....

how do you know a politician is lying.....their lips are moving....

 

[del]

I thought McCain said no earmarks and Obama said he'd make sure they were kosher.

Del, me hopes so, too.

as the old saying goes.....

how do you know a politician is lying.....their lips are moving....

hope springs eternal...

 

[random3434]

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs asserted today that Obama will return to the traditional way the statements have been used "for two centuries in order for presidents to make known constitutional problems with ideas that are in legislation without necessarily dealing a veto to the entire piece of legislation."

"I think the previous administration issued hundreds and hundreds of signing statements that specifically entailed ...that people disregard portions of legislation or the intent of Congress," Gibbs told reporters. "This president will use signing statements in order to go back to what has previously been done, and that is to enumerate constitutional problems ... but not ask that laws be disallowed simply by executive fiat."

This is great to hear, maybe we can get back to "We the People"

 

[Annie]

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs asserted today that Obama will return to the traditional way the statements have been used "for two centuries in order for presidents to make known constitutional problems with ideas that are in legislation without necessarily dealing a veto to the entire piece of legislation."

"I think the previous administration issued hundreds and hundreds of signing statements that specifically entailed ...that people disregard portions of legislation or the intent of Congress," Gibbs told reporters. "This president will use signing statements in order to go back to what has previously been done, and that is to enumerate constitutional problems ... but not ask that laws be disallowed simply by executive fiat."

This is great to hear, maybe we can get back to "We the People"

As I said, time will tell. So far, he's not missed an executive prerogative.

 

[Gunny]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

Time will tell. I hope as well that he means it. I never liked "signing statements" anymore than the "line-item veto." Both were a means to circumvent the legislature.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

What AUDACITY!

What we can be certain of is that this President has a "Comrade-Congress" and as such feels kinship with the ideological bent which is flowing from this Congress...

What, even POTENTIALLY, pray tell, would this President be disagreeing with? Meaning that given that such orders, specifically those advanced by President Bush, were orders designed to distance his Executive authority and his good name, from executing orders which he believed to be unconstitutional or at BEST arguably unconstitutional and decidely ill-advised; meaning 'not in the best interest of the individual citizens of the US...'

WHAT WOULD THIS SUBVERSIVE MARXIST (pardon the redundancy) < EVEN POTENTIALLY > be distancing himself from?

Are you informing this board that you believe that this congress is at potential odds with this President? If so... ON WHAT BASIS?

(We'll now be treated to no further discussion on what this member feels that President Hussein may be risking by issuing this decree... as this member is little more than a sychophant leftist adjulant...)

 

[del]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

What AUDACITY!

What we can be certain of is that this President has a "Comrade-Congress" and as such feels kinship with the ideological bent which is flowing from this Congress...

What, even POTENTIALLY, pray tell, would this President be disagreeing with? Meaning that given that such orders, specifically those advanced by President Bush, were orders designed to distance his Executive authority and his good name, from executing orders which he believed to be unconstitutional or at BEST arguably unconstitutional and decidely ill-advised; meaning 'not in the best interest of the individual citizens of the US...'

WHAT WOULD THIS SUBVERSIVE MARXIST (pardon the redundancy) < EVEN POTENTIALLY > be distancing himself from?

Are you informing this board that you believe that this congress is at potential odds with this President? If so... ON WHAT BASIS?

(We'll now be treated to no further discussion on what this member feels that President Hussein may be risking by issuing this decree... as this member is little more than a sychophant leftist adjulant...)

do you find your prehensile tail makes up for your lack of opposable thumbs?

given the opportunity, could you use tools?

one waits breathlessly.

 

[DiveCon]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

What AUDACITY!

What we can be certain of is that this President has a "Comrade-Congress" and as such feels kinship with the ideological bent which is flowing from this Congress...

What, even POTENTIALLY, pray tell, would this President be disagreeing with? Meaning that given that such orders, specifically those advanced by President Bush, were orders designed to distance his Executive authority and his good name, from executing orders which he believed to be unconstitutional or at BEST arguably unconstitutional and decidely ill-advised; meaning 'not in the best interest of the individual citizens of the US...'

WHAT WOULD THIS SUBVERSIVE MARXIST (pardon the redundancy) < EVEN POTENTIALLY > be distancing himself from?

Are you informing this board that you believe that this congress is at potential odds with this President? If so... ON WHAT BASIS?

(We'll now be treated to no further discussion on what this member feels that President Hussein may be risking by issuing this decree... as this member is little more than a sychophant leftist adjulant...)

do you find your prehensile tail makes up for your lack of opposable thumbs?

given the opportunity, could you use tools?

one waits breathlessly.

wait and see what his position is on signing statements when he doesnt have majorities in both bodies of congress

 

[Annie]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

WHOOPS!

Obama issues signing statement on spending bill

Obama issues signing statement on spending bill

By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer
1 hr 19 mins ago

WASHINGTON &#8211; Two days after criticizing his predecessor for issuing guidelines on how to put legislation into practice, President Barack Obama issued such a directive himself.

Out of public view Wednesday, Obama signed a $410 billion spending bill that includes billions for items known as earmarks, the targeted spending that lawmakers direct to projects in their districts. Obama promised during the presidential campaign to curb such spending.

He also issued a "signing statement" in which he objected to provisions of the bill that he said the Justice Department had advised "raise constitutional concerns." Among them are provisions that Obama said would "unduly interfere" with his authority in the foreign affairs arena by directing him how to proceed, or not to, in negotiations and discussions with international organizations and foreign governments.

Another provision, Obama said, would limit his discretion to choose who performs specific functions in military missions.

On Monday, Obama ordered a review of former President George W. Bush's guidelines for implementing bills passed by Congress &#8212; the signing statements.
Bush often issued statements when he signed bills, objecting to parts of the legislation. Critics said the statements often showed government officials how to get around a law if Bush disagreed with it on constitutional grounds.

"There is no doubt that the practice of issuing such statements can be abused," Obama wrote Monday in a memo to the heads of executive departments and agencies. "Constitutional signing statements should not be used to suggest that the president will disregard statutory requirements on the basis of policy disagreements."

At the same time, however, Obama did not rule out issuing any signing statements, which have been used for centuries. Rather, he ordered his administration to work with Congress to inform lawmakers about concerns over legality before legislation ever reaches his desk. He also pledged to use caution and restraint when writing his own signing statements, and said he would rely on Justice Department guidance when doing so.

"With these considerations in mind and based upon advice of the Department of Justice, I will issue signing statements to address constitutional concerns only when it is appropriate to do so as a means of discharging my constitutional responsibilities," Obama pledged.

 

[Annie]

I thought McCain said no earmarks and Obama said he'd make sure they were kosher.

Del, me hopes so, too.

as the old saying goes.....

how do you know a politician is lying.....their lips are moving....

Proven wise beyond your years, which is saying alot!

 

[Annie]

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs asserted today that Obama will return to the traditional way the statements have been used "for two centuries in order for presidents to make known constitutional problems with ideas that are in legislation without necessarily dealing a veto to the entire piece of legislation."

"I think the previous administration issued hundreds and hundreds of signing statements that specifically entailed ...that people disregard portions of legislation or the intent of Congress," Gibbs told reporters. "This president will use signing statements in order to go back to what has previously been done, and that is to enumerate constitutional problems ... but not ask that laws be disallowed simply by executive fiat."

This is great to hear, maybe we can get back to "We the People"

Shockingly it didn't work out that way.

 

[del]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

WHOOPS!

Obama issues signing statement on spending bill

Obama issues signing statement on spending bill

By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer
1 hr 19 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Two days after criticizing his predecessor for issuing guidelines on how to put legislation into practice, President Barack Obama issued such a directive himself.

Out of public view Wednesday, Obama signed a $410 billion spending bill that includes billions for items known as earmarks, the targeted spending that lawmakers direct to projects in their districts. Obama promised during the presidential campaign to curb such spending.

He also issued a "signing statement" in which he objected to provisions of the bill that he said the Justice Department had advised "raise constitutional concerns." Among them are provisions that Obama said would "unduly interfere" with his authority in the foreign affairs arena by directing him how to proceed, or not to, in negotiations and discussions with international organizations and foreign governments.

Another provision, Obama said, would limit his discretion to choose who performs specific functions in military missions.

On Monday, Obama ordered a review of former President George W. Bush's guidelines for implementing bills passed by Congress — the signing statements.
Bush often issued statements when he signed bills, objecting to parts of the legislation. Critics said the statements often showed government officials how to get around a law if Bush disagreed with it on constitutional grounds.

"There is no doubt that the practice of issuing such statements can be abused," Obama wrote Monday in a memo to the heads of executive departments and agencies. "Constitutional signing statements should not be used to suggest that the president will disregard statutory requirements on the basis of policy disagreements."

At the same time, however, Obama did not rule out issuing any signing statements, which have been used for centuries. Rather, he ordered his administration to work with Congress to inform lawmakers about concerns over legality before legislation ever reaches his desk. He also pledged to use caution and restraint when writing his own signing statements, and said he would rely on Justice Department guidance when doing so.

"With these considerations in mind and based upon advice of the Department of Justice, I will issue signing statements to address constitutional concerns only when it is appropriate to do so as a means of discharging my constitutional responsibilities," Obama pledged.

your point being?

 

[Annie]

Obama rebukes Bush on signing statements - 2008 Presidential Campaign Blog - Political Intelligence - Boston.com


"....., President Obama declared that he will not use "signing statements" to overturn laws because he disagrees on policy grounds, but only when he strongly believes they are unconstitutional.

In a presidential memo, Obama also ordered his top executive branch officials to seek advice from Attorney General Eric Holder about whether to enforce the hundreds of statements proffered by Bush that critics say he used to ignore bills properly passed by Congress and expand his power, particularly on national security."




i hope he means it.

WHOOPS!

Obama issues signing statement on spending bill

Obama issues signing statement on spending bill

By DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press Writer
1 hr 19 mins ago

WASHINGTON – Two days after criticizing his predecessor for issuing guidelines on how to put legislation into practice, President Barack Obama issued such a directive himself.

Out of public view Wednesday, Obama signed a $410 billion spending bill that includes billions for items known as earmarks, the targeted spending that lawmakers direct to projects in their districts. Obama promised during the presidential campaign to curb such spending.

He also issued a "signing statement" in which he objected to provisions of the bill that he said the Justice Department had advised "raise constitutional concerns." Among them are provisions that Obama said would "unduly interfere" with his authority in the foreign affairs arena by directing him how to proceed, or not to, in negotiations and discussions with international organizations and foreign governments.

Another provision, Obama said, would limit his discretion to choose who performs specific functions in military missions.

On Monday, Obama ordered a review of former President George W. Bush's guidelines for implementing bills passed by Congress — the signing statements.
Bush often issued statements when he signed bills, objecting to parts of the legislation. Critics said the statements often showed government officials how to get around a law if Bush disagreed with it on constitutional grounds.

"There is no doubt that the practice of issuing such statements can be abused," Obama wrote Monday in a memo to the heads of executive departments and agencies. "Constitutional signing statements should not be used to suggest that the president will disregard statutory requirements on the basis of policy disagreements."

At the same time, however, Obama did not rule out issuing any signing statements, which have been used for centuries. Rather, he ordered his administration to work with Congress to inform lawmakers about concerns over legality before legislation ever reaches his desk. He also pledged to use caution and restraint when writing his own signing statements, and said he would rely on Justice Department guidance when doing so.

"With these considerations in mind and based upon advice of the Department of Justice, I will issue signing statements to address constitutional concerns only when it is appropriate to do so as a means of discharging my constitutional responsibilities," Obama pledged.

your point being?

I edited my original post, hopefully more clear.