Indiana Law Blog wrote about a GAO report on presidential signing statements here. I find this subject really gripes me. The President is bound to execute the law and not write it. If the President does not like the law, he can veto the law. What we get with Bush is a fellow who cannot veto but instead tells Congress how he will (or will not) execute the law.
Anyone want to guess what the Republican response would have been if Clinton had done the same as Bush is doing?
Comments for this post
DoD Faces Mounting Pressure To Pass A First Ever Clean Audit
-
*"MILITARY TIMES" By Ellen Ioanes*
"*House lawmakers and government watchdogs express skepticism about the
Defense Department’s ability to produce a c...
3 weeks ago
