Congressman questions Patriot Act "autopen" signature

Source: CBS News

Republican Rep. Tom Graves of Georgia sent President Obama a letter today questioning the constitutionality of the president's use of a device called an autopen to sign into law an extension of the Patriot Act.

... The White House said Mr. Obama reviewed and approved the bill before authorizing the use of the autopen. The White House also highlighted the fact that the White House Office of Legal Counsel in 2005 determined that the use of the autopen was constitutional.

... In an additional statement today explaining the letter, Graves said the use of the autopen could set a "dangerous precedent."

"Any number of circumstances could arise in the future where the public could question whether or not the president authorized the use of an autopen," he said. "For example, if the president is hospitalized and not fully alert, can a group of aggressive Cabinet members interpret a wink or a squeeze of the hand as approval of an autopen signing?"

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20066922-503544.html?tag=stack

I remember that after Reagan was injured, Haig pretty much tried to assert his authority. We had a vice president, and Haig was out of place.

With the autopen, you will never know whether the president really signed a bill or whether someone else signed things automatically. The autopen should not be used to sign bills or other important documents.

good enough for anyone and the little Prick Bush used one too.

and he helped write the Constitution. Since he had access but didn't use it to sign laws, it would seem to affirm that the founding fathers didn't mean this when they wrote "Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it...".

It's a good point to note that this wasn't some far off technology they could have never anticipated when they were writing the Constitution.

waste taxpayer dollars. That is ALL they do!!! WASTE hard earned taxpayer money on SHIT!

Oh well, just one more nail in the GOP coffin.

Not "a machine shall sign" or any type of proxy signing, "HE" shall sign.

Was the wording too confusing for him?

They have a valid point.

than with a machine?

Nail on head!

He would use it to show his petty disdain for whatever he was 'signing'.

Maybe Obama was sending the same message and pissed the pubbies off.

Sonoman

Get mad at the use of the autopen, not the law that it's use to sign into extension. Incredible.

maybe it leaves open a loophole?

They probably had to implement it because even John Yoo couldn't defend that idiot Bush just making an X instead of signing his whole signature.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll036.xml

That vote was back in February when Obama signed the bill extending PATRIOT until December 8, 2011.

However, this sunset extension (stretching to 2015) was passed in the house by voice vote after only 40 minutes of debate!

is to mark the President's unambiguous and irrevocable consent to the bill, in fashion that cannot later be denied; and I expect he would be granted some latitude about how he make his mark, provided it be acknowledged to indicate his consent

In cases of incapacitation, of course, I might expect the court to rule against the autopen, depending somewhat on circumstances

This qualifies as one of the stupidest things I've heard.
And considering the number of dumb things I've heard so far this year, that's going some.

If I recall correctly, Ronald Reagan signed virtually all of the laws he approved with an autopen...

And of course we all know * must have done it that way, too, or they would have been signed with an "X".

http://www.npr.org/2011/05/27/136717719/obama-wields-his-autopen

//

Well, it's a device that's often used by rock stars or sports heroes and yes, the president of the United States, usually to sign letters. This is the first time we know of that an autopen has signed a bill into law, though its use was carefully considered by the Justice Department in the George W. Bush administration.

//

Though I still find it hard to believe, as Thomas Jefferson was using one in 1804 (though probably not to sign bills).

It would appear that previously the autopen (and Ronald Reagan's habit of having his secretary and sometimes his mother sign his documents) was only used for non-essential documents.

...But I'm still not sure about Saint Ronnie. According to one source, 80% of the signed documents supposed to be in the Reagan Presidential Library are lost or misplaced.

That's also probably an accurate gauge of how much of Reagan's work was legitimate, legal, and above the table.

I would suggest that one possible reason why so many documents are missing is because they might have been signed with an autopen. I vaguely recall a Time Magazine article from that decade which hinted at the same thing--which is why I made the apparently erroneous statement above.

but I have to side with him on this one. Usually the president uses autopens to sign mail or checks. The constitution clearly states personal signature.

Obviously President Obama would have signed it in person with a pen on actual paper, but since that is actually a Constitutional requirement then signing with an autopen should be something that is ratified as an amendment to the Constitution if the autopen is going to be acceptable. There should be caveats included, such as the President has to be healthy and conscious and of sound mind.

But the Constitution has been so abused in the last decade that maybe it doesn't matter anymore.