Bush 'Signing Statements' Questioned
Senate Looking Into President's Claims He Can Interpret Or Ignore Laws He Signs
-
Play CBS Video Video Bush, Cheney Rebuke N.Y. Times President Bush and Vice President Cheney are still upset over The New York Times disclosure of an anti-terrorism program, saying they believe it has hurt national security. Thalia Assuras reports.
-
Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., says if the president doesn’t like a bill, he should veto it. (AP /APTN)
-
Interactive Domestic Surveillance The debate over the Bush administration's controversial wiretapping program.
-
Interactive Bush Presidency The president's agenda, plus facts, figures, major events and key personalities.
-
Interactive The 109th Congress Meet the leaders and follow the action in the House and Senate.
"Congress has been more active, the president has been more active," she added. "The separation of powers is working when we have this kind of dispute."
Specter's hearing is about more than the statements. He's been compiling a list of White House practices he bluntly says could amount to abuse of executive power — from warrantless domestic wiretapping program to sending officials to hearings who refuse to answer lawmakers' questions.
But the session also concerns countering any influence Mr. Bush's signing statements may have on court decisions regarding the new laws. Courts can be expected to look to the legislature for intent, not the executive, said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas., a former state judge.
"The president is entitled to express his opinion. It's the courts that determine what the law is," he said. "I don't know why the issue of presidents issuing signing statements is controversial at all."
But Specter and his allies maintain that Mr. Bush is doing an end run around the veto process. In his presidency's sixth year, Mr. Bush has yet to issue a single veto that could be overridden with a two-thirds majority in each house.
"The president is not required to (veto)," Boardman said.
"Of course he's not — if he signs the bill," Specter snapped back.
Instead, Mr. Bush has issued hundreds of signing statements invoking his right to interpret or ignore laws on everything from whistleblower protections to how Congress oversees the Patriot Act.
"It means that the administration does not feel bound to enforce many new laws which Congress has passed," said David Golove, a New York University law professor who specializes in executive power issues. "This raises profound rule of law concerns. Do we have a functioning code of federal laws?"
Signing statements don't carry the force of law, and other presidents have issued them for administrative reasons, such as instructing an agency how to put a certain law into effect. They usually are inserted quietly into the federal record.
Mr. Bush's signing statement in March on Congress's renewal of the Patriot Act riled Specter and others who labored for months to craft a compromise between Senate and House versions, and what the White House wanted. Reluctantly, the administration relented on its objections to new congressional oversight of the way the FBI searches for terrorists.
Mr. Bush signed the bill with much flag-waving fanfare. Then he issued a signing statement asserting his right to bypass the oversight provisions in certain circumstances.
Specter isn't sure how much Congress can do to check the practice. "We may figure out a way to tie it to the confirmation process or budgetary matters," he said.
©MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie."




