More Signing Statements

Congress passed a law allowing a deal brokered by the President and India to go through, where the US would allow nuclear technology to be sold to India. Rather than rubber stamp it, this deal was subject to a number of restrictions and fierce debate in the House and Senate. They worked for nearly a year to reach a compromise. The major insertion was to control the transfer of any restricted material through the Nuclear Suppliers Group. But there were quite a few others.

This took a long time and was the kind of deliberative policy creation that was sorely lacking from the 109th Congress. And the President eliminated all of it with the stroke of a pen.

Section 103 of the Act purports to establish U.S. policy with respect to various international affairs matters. My approval of the Act does not constitute my adoption of the statements of policy as U.S. foreign policy. Given the Constitution's commitment to the presidency of the authority to conduct the Nation's foreign affairs, the executive branch shall construe such policy statements as advisory. Also, if section 104(d)(2) of the Act were construed to prohibit the executive branch from transferring or approving the transfer of an item to India contrary to Nuclear Suppliers Group transfer guidelines that may be in effect at the time of such future transfer, a serious question would exist as to whether the provision unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to an international body. In order to avoid this constitutional question, the executive branch shall construe section 104(d)(2) as advisory. The executive branch will give sections 103 and 104(d)(2) the due weight that comity between the legislative and executive branches should require, to the extent consistent with U.S. foreign policy.

The executive branch shall construe provisions of the Act that mandate, regulate, or prohibit submission of information to the Congress, an international organization, or the public, such as sections 104, 109, 261, 271, 272, 273, 274, and 275, in a manner consistent with the President's constitutional authority to protect and control information that could impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative processes of the Executive, or the performance of the Executive's constitutional duties.

Shorter signing statement: I'll do whatever I want.

This is becoming epidemic. We have a President who rewrites laws at his whim. This is a Constitutional crisis, and should be a major part of the 2008 election debate. We should not elect a new President who doesn't denounce this use of signing statements and pledge to never use them in this manner. And as for the current resident, there needs to be a judicial reckoning on the constitutionality of such actions.