Bush caught a lot of flak from Democrats in Congress and probably others for using signing statements to, as far as I understand it, defy Congressional intentions when it came to enforcing laws.
Obama criticized Bush for this on the campaign trail, though I don’t recall it being a major talking point.
I never followed the arguments about signing statements, so can someone provide a bit of a primer on Bush’s use of them, Obama’s use of them, and how their uses differ from earlier presidents (if at all)?
Do you have a link to the original, or anywhere else I can see what the actual signing statements were? The article seems a bit whack, as it states “in which he claims authority to bypass the provisions of measures he signs into law”, without actual examples, but then also brings up “Administration officials told the Times Obama’s signing statements are based on traditional interpretations of the Constitution, reflecting routine presidential reservations.”
I don’t have any problem whatsoever with the bolded portion. As for the first claim, I’d like to see what it was exactly before judging.
I don’t really have more information. I read that article, said, “Huh, I remember the hullaballoo but nothing specific” and hoped someone who had been following the thing would be able to point me in the right direction.
If I remember correctly, Congress told Obama how to behave in diplomatic relations with other countries, and Obama said ‘I’m signing this bill, and taking this money, but you don’t have the authority to tell me how to do that.’