House overwhelmingly rejects (429-2) Obama Signing Statement

July 9, 11:40 PMDC Republican ExaminerBill Dupray

Previous Next

7 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the DC Republican Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Maybe you remember this one, when Obama signed a bill last month, which, if I remember my Schoolhouse Rock correctly, makes it a law, he said he would simply ignore the parts he didn't like. This is something a dictator in a banana republic might say. After all, everybody knows that Legislatures can be a real pain in the arse when it comes to taking over the country.

Well, the House has this crazy notion that President Obama is not above the law.

The gist of the thing is that last month's supplemental war appropriations bill was loaded up with funds for the World Bank and IMF. The GOP opposed that part of it, while supporting the funding for the troops. As a compromise, the Democrats agreed to add in some oversight and accountability provisions for the World Bank and IMF cash. It is that oversight that Obama said he would ignore.

The House rebuked President Obama for trying to ignore restrictions to international aid payments, voting overwhelmingly for an amendment forcing the administration to abide by its constraints.

House members approved an amendment by a 429-2 vote to have the Obama administration pressure the World Bank to strengthen labor and environmental standards and require a Treasury Department report on World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) activities. . . .

The conditions on World Bank and IMF funding were part of the $106 billion war supplemental bill that was passed last month. Obama, in a statement made as he signed the bill, said that he would ignore the conditions.

So if Obama wants any of the money, which I am pretty sure the Constitution says he needs to get from Congress, he's going to have to follow the law passed by the people's representatives. Otherwise, he gets squat.

Frank and Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Texas) said that one way they could get presidents to stop issuing signing statements casting aside laws would be to refuse to fund their priorities. The amendment passed Thursday seeks to nullify Obama's signing statement by withholding funds from any agreement involving the Treasury Department that doesn't follow the conditions set out in the supplemental bill.

"The signal we send to the Treasury is very clear: Ignore statute at your peril," Kirk said.

I realize that all presidents issue signing statements, and my feeling is that if they don't like a part of the law, they can always veto the thing and send it back. This bill, however, may not have passed at all, but for the oversight on the cash. So to ignore the stuff the Republicans wanted, in return for voting for the bill, simply nullifies their votes. And, unlike our previous presidents, Obama is all about centralizing power in himself and his 33 czars, none of whom is confirmed by the Senate and all of whom are unaccountable to Congress. Nice to see one of the co-equal branches, especially "the people's house," asserting some of its own Constitutional power.