Bush Balks at Criteria for FEMA Director

President Bush reserved the right to ignore key changes in Congress's overhaul of the Federal Emergency Management Agency -- including a requirement to appoint someone with experience handling disasters as the agency's head -- in setting aside dozens of provisions contained in a major homeland security spending bill this week.

Besides objecting to Congress's list of qualifications for FEMA's director, the White House also claimed the right to edit or withhold reports to Congress by a watchdog agency within the Department of Homeland Security that is responsible for protecting Americans' personal privacy.

The standards for the FEMA director were inspired by criticism of former FEMA chief Michael D. Brown's performance after Hurricane Katrina last year. Brown, a lawyer and judge of Arabian horses, had no experience in disaster response before joining FEMA.

Bush's moves came in a controversial assertion of executive authority known as a "signing statement," which the White House issued late Wednesday, the same day the president signed the $34.8 billion measure. Congress has assailed the unprecedented extent of Bush's use of signing statements to reinterpret or repudiate measures approved by lawmakers instead of exercising a formal veto.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/06/AR2006100601527.html

:sarcasm:

On edit: Why the f*ck are we paying Congress? Bush does whatever he wants to do and they don't do a damn thing to stop him ... so why are they even there? :grr:

It's a dirty job but someone's gotta do it.

...

Ah, sorry. Almost forgot. :sarcasm:

repeal ALL signing statements and pass a law prohibiting future signing statements.

...you'll begin to see why they're there. As soon as legislation is brought up to reverse the last six horrific years, you'll see why they're there. As soon as we see Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Rove, Pearl, Wolfowitz (the list is endless) in the dock, you'll see why they're there.

Let freedom and democracy ring in November. Let the awesome righteousness of truth begin to hammer in January.

Here is an issue that the American public can understand. For God's sake, Dems, make an issue of this signing statement! People remember Katrina and Brownie.

ox·y·mo·ron (ŏk'sē-môr'ŏn', -mōr'-) pronunciation
n., pl. -mo·ra (-môr'ə, -mōr'ə) or -rons.

A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.

nothing to these guys.

has * used these signing statements?
--from the beginning, if my memory serves.

How long has the media covered, in any regard, his use of signing statements?
--again from memory, much less time -- perhaps the past year or two?

And yes, exactly how much has "Congress assailed" these when * is still perfectly free to continue to use them?


Sickening in the extreme. The Post et al are now trying to cover their asses, even they must have forgotten there are records kept that will disprove their vaunted, supposedly long-standing but in actuality newly-refound, integrity.

"Congress has assailed the unprecedented extent of Bush's use of signing statements to reinterpret or repudiate measures approved by lawmakers instead of exercising a formal veto."

Huh? I must have missed that.

This corrupt congress has literally depended on this extralegal creation to allow them to "pass" a law they never intended to enforce in the first place.

If there's one thing The Decider is consistent about it's his propensity to clutch at power. He always issues signing statements like this in an attempt to avoid accountability to Congress. Notice he's saying he'll decide if he's going to send reports to Congress or not - that's pretty common for him. This is the equivalent of the line item veto that the SCOTUS rejected.

No worries, we'll set the record straight on this starting in January.

In fact, it's worse.

Using signing statements, der Chimpinator can cherry-pick what specific regulations he chooses to ignore even in long provisions of a bill. Or even re-define them.

Win-win for him - first pay up a cronie, then insulates himself from blame. How dares Congress interfere with that?

It seems to me the problem is not whether Bush nominates a mouth-breather, but rather whether the Senate is willing to insist on its own requirements during the confirmation process or just give Bush what he wants.

"The White House also reserved the right to withhold or alter reports of a unit that monitors DHS use of Americans' personal information in background checks, employment screening and air travel, among other things."

The President wants Homeland Security to be able to use and misuse information protected by the Privacy Act of 1974. This is just another affront in a long line--a rejection of reforms that were brought about by Watergate. The restoration of the Imperial Presidency is almost complete, and this time, we don't have anyone nearly as competent as Nixon at the helm (sarcasm).

Never mind the fact that he took a single attack and escalated it into a regional war in order to aggrandize himself...

Bush will spend most of the next two years defending his violations of the Constitution. May John Conyers' gavel knock the shitstain right on that empty noggin of his.

Newsprism

he has held, so he is only expecting from others what was expected of him. It's not qualifications but CONNECTIONS that matter to the BFEE.

Why would he want to employ someone more competent than himself. Funny how most of Americans have to meet certain requirement for their employment.

has put in place has been a disaster. Why should we trust his judgment now?

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

The president does not make the laws. Somebody needs to bitch slap Bush until he gets that through his head.

al. So where the heck do they get off using these signing statements and no one says a damn thing about them at all. Congress passes the law and the President either signs it or vetoes it.

because they are Bush's own admission that he is above the law, and that he is also above the courts.

On edit:

Maybe BusHitler wants something in writing about having Arabian Horse show experience :sarcasm:

bu$h has nullified the congress and they have just sat back an let him do it.

Congress no longer needs to meet unless they plan on getting a spine and stopping the mad man at 1600 Pennsylvania

Katrina was a important lesson for George and he learned it well. ... Not.

}(

Lisby

DISGRACEFUL HE IS!

This really takes the cake.

presented to the President ..; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to the House in which it .. originated it, who shall .. reconsider it ..."

He swore (Const Art II Sec 1 Par 8) to uphold that: if he don't like a Bill, he's bound to send it back with his explanation ...

or am I on the bus to crazy town...
:shrug:

:(

as usual.