Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Aren't the 700+ signing statements actually vetos? Can't we argue that

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:13 AM
Original message
Aren't the 700+ signing statements actually vetos? Can't we argue that
these laws have never been passed?


Section. 7.

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

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, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.


If he adds conditions or statements as to why certain things don't apply to him, are these "laws" even valid? Wouldn't it be the same as a veto? Who knows how much of this Republican (mis)Administration's damage we could undo by getting a court to agree that these signing statements were, in effect, Objections which should have been returned to the House, entered into their Journal and reconsidered (requiring 2/3 to approve).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
goddess40 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
1. They're bigger than veto's, they're laws don't apply to me
Edited on Fri Jun-16-06 11:17 AM by goddess40
But to everyone that comes after, at least the democrats. It is the republican arrogance at it's best. I'm guessing that the provision was established for some valid reason but it is definitely being exploited beyond anything reasonable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
2. I'm not a constitutional scholar and don't even play one on TV . . .
But as I understand the commentary about signing statements, they're extra-Constitutional: Bush has signed the bills as required, but as all-powerful, "unitary" executive, he reserves the right to wipe his ass with them if he sees fit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Metta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
3. Line item vetos, it seems to me.
:donut: :donut:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
4. Not a veto because if the president vetoes a law, then the Congress
is allowed to vote to over-ride the veto. With a signing statement, the Congress has no recourse. It's putting the office of the executive above the law and should be eliminated via a real Constitutional amendment or ruling from US Supreme Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktlyon Donating Member (733 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
5. I would think the signature would make it law, the signing statement
would not apply if it was contrary to the law. The signing statement is like a note to explain the law. I have no legal knowledge but hope this is the way it washes out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC