Congressional Research Service report says Bush signing statements are weakening CongressBreaking News
"It seems evident that the Bush signing statements are an integral part of the Administration's efforts to further its broad view of presidential prerogatives and to assert functional and determinative control over all elements of the executive decisionmaking process," the CRS study said.
"It appears that recent administrations, as made apparent by the voluminous challenges lodged by President George W. Bush, have employed these instruments in an attempt to leverage power and control away from Congress by establishing these broad assertions of authority as a constitutional norm."
Signing statements have been issued by Presidents for over a century and are not inherently problematic. To the contrary, they may be beneficial to the extent that they alert Congress and the public to Presidential actions and intentions.
Yet the Bush Administration has been issuing signing statements with growing frequency, as reported earlier this year by Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe, and in a way that involves a"qualitative difference" from their use in the past, according to the CRS. The Bush signing statements appear to be part of a larger campaign to seize increased Presidential authority, the CRS said.v"The broad and persistent nature of the claims of executive authority forwarded by President Bush appear designed to inure [i.e., to accustom] Congress, as well as others, to the belief that the President in fact possesses expansive and exclusive powers upon which the other branches may not intrude," the CRS report stated.
It follows that"the appropriate focus of congressional concern should center not on the issuance of signing statements themselves, but on the broad assertions of presidential authority forwarded by Presidents and the substantive actions taken to establish that authority."
The CRS study, written by T.J. Halstead, provides abundant information on the history of presidential signing statements, describes their limited impact on the judicial process, critiques a recent American Bar Association report on the subject, and more.
Like other CRS products, this study has not been made directly available to the public by CRS. A copy was obtained by Secrecy News. See"Presidential Signing Statements: Constitutional and Institutional Implications," September 22, 2006:
comments powered by Disqus
- In Trump’s America, is the Supreme Court still seen as legitimate?
- The Republican Plan to Repeal Obamacare for Everybody But Alaska Might Be Unconstitutional
- Parliament Square in London Is Closer to Having First Female Statue
- Battle Over Confederate Monuments Moves to the Cemeteries
- German WW1 U-boat found off Belgian coast
- Yale history department now emphasizing global history in undergraduate courses
- University of Utah appoints first Mormon Studies professor
- Eric Foner discusses the manipulation of history
- Male historian tapped to lead Department of Women, Gender and Sexuality Studies at the University of Kansas
- Decline in History Majors Continues, Departments Respond