Bush brushed aside the Constitution to veto a defense spending bill.

[babylonsister]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-spitzer8jan08,0,5871931.story

The 'pocket veto' peril
Bush brushed aside the Constitution to veto a defense spending bill.
By Robert J. Spitzer
January 8, 2008


Pundits and pols who have been tracking President Bush's constitutional transgressions can add another to the list: his Dec. 28 "pocket veto" of the massive defense spending bill. Instead of issuing a regular veto, which allows Congress the opportunity to override if it can muster the votes, Bush stated that he needed to pocket veto the bill -- a power the Constitution says may only be used when "Congress by their Adjournment prevent Return." Bush argued that he was "prevented" from "returning" the bill to Congress because the House had adjourned.

But Bush was being disingenuous. In fact, a pocket veto was neither necessary nor allowed in this case. In misusing his veto power, Bush was attempting to grab a power for himself and his office that the Constitution's framers emphatically and repeatedly denied to the president: a nearly unlimited, absolute veto.

Let me explain. The Constitution requires the president to sign or veto any bill sent to his desk by Congress. In most cases, when a bill is vetoed, it is sent back to Congress, which then has the option to override the veto if it can achieve a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate. Under certain limited circumstances, however, the president may issue a pocket veto, a form of rejection in which he does not sign the bill or return it to Congress -- and the bill dies after 10 days. Congress has no opportunity to override the veto.

Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution stipulates the two conditions necessary for a pocket veto. The first is congressional adjournment. The second condition is that bill return is "prevented." These two linked conditions acknowledge the existence of adjournments when bill return is possible -- and the current situation is just such a case.

snip//

If this all sounds like constitutional arcania, consider the outcome if Bush's faux pocket veto stands unchallenged: Presidents would have absolute veto power any time Congress is not actually in session, bestowing on the chief executive the very authority the founders sought to deny the office. And why did Bush use this veto gambit now? Maybe because the bill in question passed by veto-proof margins.

Regardless of the motive, the Constitution does not allow presidents to pick the kind of veto they wish to use, and it certainly does not condone a pocket veto just because an override is likely. The existing regular veto is plenty potent, and Congress cannot be denied its constitutional right to review vetoes as long as bill return is possible. Congress should do what it did before: treat Bush's action as a return veto because the bill was returned. And presidents should curb the impulse to play fast and loose with constitutional powers.

[fenriswolf]

1. so did the pocket veto stand? i love the history

but i thought that his little pocket veto thing wouldnt work and he would have to veto it directly.

[babylonsister]

4. I think 'he' thinks he vetoed it, but it might still be up in the air. Here's

Reid and Pelosi's statement:

http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=289982&

[panader0]

2. K&R I didn't know about this, Thanks

[Rageneau]

3. I hereby nominate the Worst President Ever for Worst American Ever.

Personally, I think Benedict Arnold still had a lot to offer his country after his "trouble."

Smirk, OTOH, has permanently become less than useless.

He rots everything he touches, and keeps stinking up the place.

[fenriswolf]

5. kinda funny bush claims he is vetoing it

because "iraq" wants him to. oh jeez i think i just lost my marbles.

[madrchsod]

6. Constitution?---- what is this constitution you speak of?

wait.... i saw that constitution when i was a kid 50 years ago !...it was in some big building in washington dc...ya it was pretty cool. i wonder if it is still there......

[Traveling_Home]

7. Couldn't Reid and Pelosi have prevented this? They scheduled vote! n/t

[warren pease]

8. Why is it bad news that Bushie vetoed a bill that contains this language?

I mean, I can understand the Constitutional implications, but we're so far past the Constitution in this country that the encroaching national security state worries me a hell of a lot more.


(Boldface mine)

SEC. 1814. REQUIREMENT FOR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE TO PREPARE PLAN FOR RESPONSE TO NATURAL DISASTERS AND TERRORIST EVENTS.

(a) Requirement for Plan-

(1) IN GENERAL- Not later than June 1, 2008, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the commander of the United States Northern Command, and the Chief of the National Guard Bureau, shall prepare and submit to Congress a plan for coordinating the use of the National Guard and members of the Armed Forces on active duty when responding to natural disasters, acts of terrorism, and other man-made disasters as identified in the national planning scenarios described in subsection (e).

(2) UPDATE- Not later than June 1, 2010, the Secretary, in consultation with the persons consulted under paragraph (1), shall submit to Congress an update of the plan required under paragraph (1).

(b) Information To Be Provided to Secretary- To assist the Secretary of Defense in preparing the plan, the National Guard Bureau, pursuant to its purpose as channel of communications as set forth in section 10501(b) of title 10, United States Code, shall provide to the Secretary information gathered from Governors, adjutants general of States, and other State civil authorities responsible for homeland preparation and response to natural and man-made disasters.

(c) Two Versions- The plan shall set forth two versions of response, one using only members of the National Guard, and one using both members of the National Guard and members of the regular components of the Armed Forces.

(d) Matters Covered- The plan shall cover, at a minimum, the following:

(1) Protocols for the Department of Defense, the National Guard Bureau, and the Governors of the several States to carry out operations in coordination with each other and to ensure that Governors and local communities are properly informed and remain in control in their respective States and communities.

(2) An identification of operational procedures, command structures, and lines of communication to ensure a coordinated, efficient response to contingencies.

(3) An identification of the training and equipment needed for both National Guard personnel and members of the Armed Forces on active duty to provide military assistance to civil authorities and for other domestic operations to respond to hazards identified in the national planning scenarios.

(e) National Planning Scenarios- The plan shall provide for response to the following hazards:

(1) Nuclear detonation, biological attack, biological disease outbreak/pandemic flu, the plague, chemical attack-blister agent, chemical attack-toxic industrial chemicals, chemical attack-nerve agent, chemical attack-chlorine tank explosion, major hurricane, major earthquake, radiological attack-radiological dispersal device, explosives attack-bombing using improvised explosive device, biological attack-food contamination, biological attack-foreign animal disease and cyber attack.

(2) Any other hazards identified in a national planning scenario developed by the Homeland Security Council.

SEC. 1815. DETERMINATION OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE CIVIL SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS.

(a) Determination of Requirements- The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall determine the military-unique capabilities needed to be provided by the Department of Defense to support civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident.

(b) Plan for Funding Capabilities-

(1) PLAN- The Secretary of Defense shall develop and implement a plan, in coordination with the Secretaries of the military departments and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, for providing the funds and resources necessary to develop and maintain the following:

(A) The military-unique capabilities determined under subsection (a).

(B) Any additional capabilities determined by the Secretary to be necessary to support the use of the active components and the reserve components of the Armed Forces for homeland defense missions, domestic emergency responses, and providing military support to civil authorities.

(2) TERM OF PLAN- The plan required under paragraph (1) shall cover at least five years.

(c) Budget- The Secretary of Defense shall include in the materials accompanying the budget submitted for each fiscal year a request for funds necessary to carry out the plan required under subsection (b) during the fiscal year covered by the budget. The defense budget materials shall delineate and explain the budget treatment of the plan for each component of each military department, each combatant command, and each affected Defense Agency.

(d) Definitions- In this section:

(1) The term `military-unique capabilities' means those capabilities that, in the view of the Secretary of Defense--

(A) cannot be provided by other Federal, State, or local civilian agencies; and

(B) are essential to provide support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident.

(2) The term `defense budget materials', with respect to a fiscal year, means the materials submitted to Congress by the Secretary of Defense in support of the budget for that fiscal year.

(e) Strategic Planning Guidance- Section 113(g)(2) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking `contingency plans' at the end of the first sentence and inserting the following: `contingency plans, including plans for providing support to civil authorities in an incident of national significance or a catastrophic incident, for homeland defense, and for military support to civil authorities'.

Subtitle B--Additional Reserve Component Enhancement

SEC. 1821. UNITED STATES NORTHERN COMMAND.

(a) Manpower Review-

(1) REVIEW BY CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF- Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall submit to the Secretary of Defense a review of the civilian and military positions, job descriptions, and assignments within the United States Northern Command with the goal of determining the feasibility of significantly increasing the number of members of a reserve component assigned to, and civilians employed by, the United States Northern Command who have experience in the planning, training, and employment of forces for homeland defense missions, domestic emergency response, and providing military support to civil authorities.

(2) SUBMISSION OF RESULTS OF REVIEW- Not later than 90 days after the date on which the Secretary of Defense receives the results of the review under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a copy of the results of the review, together with such recommendations as the Secretary considers appropriate to achieve the objectives of the review.

(b) Definition- In this section, the term `United States Northern Command' means the combatant command the geographic area of responsibility of which includes the United States.

So, according to this, we're one bird flu outbreak from imposition of martial law, and there's where the troops and the tanks are going to come from. I always thought it would be Blackwater, but you never know with BushCo.

You can read the entire bill here, but only if you're trying to prove that you absolutely have no life. Also note that it dovetails nicely with NSPD 51/HSPD 20, that "continuity of government" fraud to give Bush the title of Intergalactic Czar for Life if a leaf drops off a maple tree somewhere and comes down funny, or some equally thin pretext.

Also, why did it pass the House 397 - 27, with 202 democrats voting for it and the only opposition coming from Kucinich, SF Bay Area reps and the Black Caucus? This is the same kind of lopsided vote that allowed that disgraceful HR 1955, the "homegrown terrorist prevention act," to pass virtually unchallenged. Don't these people read this shit? Or do they just think BushCo is all bark and no bite? If the latter, they really need their heads examined.


wp