Signing statements are wrong and used extraconstitionally. I can't believe Obama is using them. They are creating outrage among Democrats in the house and senate and they are being quoted everywhere today in articles about it.
Democrats irked by Obama signing statement
By ANNE FLAHERTY (AP) – 41 minutes ago
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama has irked close allies in Congress by declaring he has the right to ignore legislation on constitutional grounds after having criticized George W. Bush for doing the same.
Four senior House Democrats on Tuesday said they were "surprised" and "chagrined" by Obama's declaration in June that he doesn't have to comply with provisions in a war spending bill that puts conditions on aid provided to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.
http://www.google.com/...
Dem chairmen warn Obama on 'signing statements'
Democrats consistently ripped President Bush for his "signing statements" on bills -- which essentially gave the administration a legal out to ignore certain provisions in laws.
But now President Obama is doing the same thing -- and his own party is just as unhappy.
Four top Democrats sent a letter to the president Tuesday, saying they were "surprised" that Obama, in signing the war supplemental spending bill, declared he would not be bound by limits on International Monetary Fund money. The IMF funding was one of the more controversial aspects of that spending bill, and Democrats worked hard to include it.
The letter was signed by Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wisc.) and Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), as well as Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), who chairs the foreign operations appropriations subcommittee, and Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), who chairs a Financial Services subcommittee that deals with IMF funding.
http://www.politico.com/...
JONATHAN TURLEY ON COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN
As Steve wrote about earlier today, President Bush, in a blatant abuse of his power and the law, has used signing statements to rewrite some 1100 laws enacted by Congress, which is more than all other presidents in our nation's history--combined. On Tuesday's "Countdown", Jonathan Turley joined Keith Olbermann to discuss those signing statements and what appears to be blowback from federal officials who are refusing to follow Bush's lead as it may have legal implications for them down the road.
http://crooksandliars.com/...
I GOT THIS FROM AFTER DOWNING STREET ABOUT BUSH
Self-Impeachment by Signing Statement
Submitted by davidswanson on Thu, 2007-04-05 01:10. Congress Evidence Impeachment
UPDATE: New Database of Signing Statements
By David Swanson
Imagine a president who violates numerous laws that predate his presidency. Imagine that Congress redundantly and repeatedly re-bans that criminal behavior. Imagine a president who repeatedly throws out the new bans with signing statements and continues to violate the same laws. This is the heart of the matter of the Bush "signing statements." It is an unprecedented use of signing statements. And it is something that too many of us are unaware of and too many others aware of but apparently unwilling to face
The problem with this administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation hat the President does not like and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation," Obama answered. But, he added: "No one doubts that it is appropriate to use signing statements to protect a president's constitutional prerogatives."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
THe bolded is what Obama is doing!!! He is going back on his word and I am totally outraged.
FOR PEOPLE DOWN BELOW IN THE COMMENTS HERE IS THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE
OBAMA THIS YEAR-declared he would not be bound by limits on International Monetary Fund money.
OBAMA LAST YEAR-to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation hat the President does not like