Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Franks, Obey, Meeks and Lowey "irked", say Obama sounds like George W. Bush

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
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 06:00 PM
Original message
Franks, Obey, Meeks and Lowey "irked", say Obama sounds like George W. Bush
Jul 21 03:39 PM US/Eastern WASHINGTON (AP) - 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.

In a signing statement accompanying the $106 billion bill, Obama said he wouldn't allow the legislation to interfere with his authority as president to conduct foreign policy and negotiate with other governments. Earlier in his 6-month-old administration, Obama issued a signing statement regarding provisions in a $410 billion omnibus spending bill.

"During the previous administration, all of us were critical of (Bush's) assertion that he could pick and choose which aspects of congressional statutes he was required to enforce," the Democrats wrote in their letter to Obama. "We were therefore chagrined to see you appear to express a similar attitude."

The letter was signed by Reps. David Obey of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, and Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, as well as Reps. Nita Lowey and Gregory Meeks, both of New York, who chair subcommittees on those panels.


Obey and Frank in particular are needed by Obama to push through Congress key pieces of his agenda, including health care and financial oversight reform.

The White House said Tuesday the administration plans to implement the provisions of the bill and suggested that Obama's signing statement was aimed more at defending the president's executive powers than skirting the law.

"The president has also already made it clear that he will not ignore statutory obligations on the basis of policy disagreements and will reserve signing statements for legislation that raises clearly identified constitutional concerns," White House spokesman Ben LaBolt said in a statement.

Bush issued a record number of signing statements while in office as he sparred with Democrats on such big issues as the war in Iraq.

Democrats, including Obama, sharply criticized Bush as overstepping his bounds as president. In March, Obama ordered a review of Bush's guidelines for implementing legislation.

"There is no doubt that the practice of issuing such statements can be abused," Obama wrote in a memo to the heads of executive departments and agencies.

...

Obey and the other House lawmakers said this week that Obama's signing statement on the war bill will make it tougher in the future to persuade other lawmakers to support the World Bank and IMF.

If Congress can't place conditions on the money, "it will make it virtually impossible to provide further allocations for these institutions," they wrote.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_12883038

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jTUXZ57-4A_UnsbDtQDPlUwZlbIQD99J2TQO0



Why now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kicking for "why now?"
By the way this is the headline in the first link, for those who may think I came up with it.

>>>>Irked Dems say Obama sounds like George W. Bush<<<<
http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_12883038
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 06:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. If the President believes that the legislation is unconstitutional, he should veto it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. I agree, this happened last month. Why do you think they waited
until now to make their disagreement public?
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 Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:35 AM
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