Part II: Stealth Veto: Re-Writing Laws When the Cameras Are Turned Off
President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted when he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.
Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, "whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research…Bush and his legal team have spent the past five years quietly working to concentrate ever more government power into the White House.
--"Bush Challenges Hundreds of Laws," Charlie Savage, Boston Globe, April 30, 2006.
Here is how he does it. For example, recently, there was quite a public uproar when it became known that prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison were being tortured by American army guards. Congress wanted to pass a law demanding that our wartime prisons abide by the Geneva conventions and not permit torture.
Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld disagreed. They still believe that torture is a good thing.
So Senator John McCain, greatly revered former prisoner of war, wrote a very public essay in Time magazine explaining that, not only does torture not work, because whoever is being tortured will say anything to get it to stop, and he should know, since he endured unbearable torture at the hands of enemy troops. He also pointed out that for Americans to embrace torture in OUR prisons, puts our OWN soldiers and Marines at very grave risk should they ever be taken prisoner by our enemies. And that, finally, shouldn't we, as a free, democratic, Christian nation, stand for something BETTER?
Congress agreed, and Bush threatened to veto the bill. But when even conservative talk radio and so-called "think tank" publications spoke out against this policy, Bush suddenly about-faced, and agreed to sign the bill.
He did so, to great public TV-camera fanfare. Big handshake with Senator McCain. Big speech about what a big day it was for the country.
Then, after everybody left, Bush quietly sat down and signed one of the 750 "signing statements" that he has used since taking office. This is an official document in which the president interprets the law his own way, a sort of amendment tacked on to the end of the bill that says, in effect, that Bush does not have to abide by the law that he just signed. That, in this case, as commander in chief, if he feels torture is a good thing, he can allow torture.
There weren't any TV cameras for that. But it is now the law of the land. He has since added signing statements to every single military rule and regulation that Congress has passed, stating that he can ignore them.
Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, "whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research…Bush and his legal team have spent the past five years quietly working to concentrate ever more government power into the White House.
--"Bush Challenges Hundreds of Laws," Charlie Savage, Boston Globe, April 30, 2006.
Here is how he does it. For example, recently, there was quite a public uproar when it became known that prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison were being tortured by American army guards. Congress wanted to pass a law demanding that our wartime prisons abide by the Geneva conventions and not permit torture.
Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld disagreed. They still believe that torture is a good thing.
So Senator John McCain, greatly revered former prisoner of war, wrote a very public essay in Time magazine explaining that, not only does torture not work, because whoever is being tortured will say anything to get it to stop, and he should know, since he endured unbearable torture at the hands of enemy troops. He also pointed out that for Americans to embrace torture in OUR prisons, puts our OWN soldiers and Marines at very grave risk should they ever be taken prisoner by our enemies. And that, finally, shouldn't we, as a free, democratic, Christian nation, stand for something BETTER?
Congress agreed, and Bush threatened to veto the bill. But when even conservative talk radio and so-called "think tank" publications spoke out against this policy, Bush suddenly about-faced, and agreed to sign the bill.
He did so, to great public TV-camera fanfare. Big handshake with Senator McCain. Big speech about what a big day it was for the country.
Then, after everybody left, Bush quietly sat down and signed one of the 750 "signing statements" that he has used since taking office. This is an official document in which the president interprets the law his own way, a sort of amendment tacked on to the end of the bill that says, in effect, that Bush does not have to abide by the law that he just signed. That, in this case, as commander in chief, if he feels torture is a good thing, he can allow torture.
There weren't any TV cameras for that. But it is now the law of the land. He has since added signing statements to every single military rule and regulation that Congress has passed, stating that he can ignore them.
posted by Deanie Mills at 8:39 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home