The administration has been on a tear the past two weeks as the time runs out on the Bush presidency. First, on October 8, President Bush issued two separate signing statements to the same bill--HR 7081--which was the much anticipated bill regarding US nuclear cooperation with India. And this signing statement was as much anticipated as the bill itself was--for India.
Ever since the administration issued its signing statement two years ago to the first round of nuclear trade with India, which I blogged here, the Indian press has been keenly interested in the signing statement. Two years ago, the signing statement was used to mollify the Indian Government over what it felt was a violation of its sovereignty by the United States Congress, which placed all kinds of conditions for the deal to go through.
Thus when Secretary of State Rice was in India recently, her word that the new bill would meet with India's approval was not good enough--India required her to show them Bush's proposed signing statement before they were "basically OK with it."
President Bush issued two signing statements to the bill--the first, done in a formal signing ceremony--with a bipartisan contingent of congresspersons on hand, as well as representatives from the diplomatic corps and the press, and is designed to be as positive as possible about the good work at hand (what is interesting is the size of the gathering and the lack of significant press attention in the US). The second signing statement is addressed to the Indian government and is short and sweet--to paraphrase: "Despite what the Congress may have placed in riders, this bill will give you exactly what we promised." This is precisely what the Indian press picked up on, as this report in the Times of India confirms (see second paragraph).
Then on Tuesday the 14th, President Bush issued two different signing statements that have gotten the press in the US all in a bunch. The first is HR 928, the "Inspector General Reform Act of 2008" and the second is S. 3001, the "Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009."
In the first, President Bush challenged two provisions of the bill: Section 6, which allows the Inspectors General to seek separate counsel if it chooses to do so. In this challenge, President Bush declares that ultimate interpretation of the law lies with the Attorney General (who is under the direct supervision of the Attorney General). The second is Section 8, which requires the Inspector General to transmit budget estimates--with specific criteria--to the President for his approval, which the president is then required to transmit to the Congress in his annual budget. In this challenge, President Bush argues that the power to recommend is the president's only, and Congress may not tell him what things he should or should not include in that request (although the Congress normally places ample pressure on the president to get him to give them what they want).
In the second, President Bush issued four separate challenges to the bill, and an additional challenge that remains vague. Also, the reasons for disagreement remain mysterious as Bush dumps them together: Bush writes, "Provisions of the Act, including sections 851, 901, 1211(2), and 1508(b), purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the President's ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to conduct diplomatic negotiations, to supervise the executive branch, to appoint officers of the United States, and to execute his authority as Commander in Chief." And then the best one of all: "The executive branch shall continue to construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority and obligations of the President." Which ones again?
And then today, President Bush issued a public signing statement to commemorate the signing of HR 7222, the "Andean Trade Preference Act Extension," which was signed in Room 350 of the Eisenhower Building, a room used when the White House wants a lot of press attention. This is a great signing ceremony not because it is accompanied with lots of pictures (including the picture of the signing desk, with the sign "Opportunities Through Trade"), but because the person doing the transcription had to correct, and make note of, an error in Bush's language. President Bush, in explaining the bill, called it the "Andea Trade Preference Act", which the transcriptionist had to add, the "Andea (sic) Trade Preference Act"--it should have been the "Andean Trade Preference Act." As far as I can remember, this is a first.
