All Blog Posts from Political Hotsheet

President Obama this afternoon privately signed the $410 billion omnibus spending bill passed by Congress, which he has acknowledged is “imperfect” because of potentially-unnecessary earmarks. (Read more about the bill here.)

In announcing his signing of the bill, the president issued a signing statement saying the Department of Justice has advised him that the bill includes provisions that “raise constitutional concerns” and that he thus may not follow them.

“The signing statement on the Omnibus bill very much resembles the kind that President Bush was criticized for,” notes CBS News White House Correspondent Mark Knoller.

Mr. Obama outlined five objections in the statement. The first is that certain provisions “would unduly interfere with my constitutional authority in the area of foreign affairs by effectively directing the Executive on how to proceed or not proceed in negotiations or discussions with international organizations and foreign governments.”

“I will not treat these provisions as limiting my ability to negotiate and enter into agreements with foreign nations,” the president said.

Read full post…

Last week, we learned that the Obama Administration was willing to leave for another day the question of the legitimate, lawful scope of its “executive privilege” to mute former White House subordinates like Karl Rove and Harriet Miers. On Monday, we learned from Charlie Savage of the New York Times that the administration also can wait for an answer about the constitutional scope of a president’s power to issue “signing statements” in the way they were used by George W. Bush during his tenure at the White House. (More here.)

In both cases, the Obama White House sacrificed a measure of principle to achieve a form of pragmatism. In both cases, it reversed the practical import of Bush policy but kept for itself the option of reversing back yet again should circumstances require it. In both cases, it sought to avoid a court ruling that it may or may not have wanted for its own sake and for the sake of future presidencies. Sort of like cautious lawyer-politicians acting like… cautious lawyer-politicians! Go figure.

Read full post…