Welcome to PatsFans.com

Another Bush Amendment

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by scout, Oct 6, 2006.

  1. scout

    scout Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,722
    Likes Received:
    30
    Ratings:
    +50 / 0 / -2

    #15 Jersey

    In the law Bush signed Wednesday, Congress stated that no one but the privacy officers could alter, delay or prohibit the mandatory annual report on Homeland Security Department activities that effect privacy, including complaints.
    But Bush signed a statement attached to the bill. He will interpret that section in a manner consistent with the president's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch.
    Bush's signing statement challenges several other provisions in the bill. Bush, for example, said he would disregard a requirement that the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency must have at least five years of experience and "demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency and management and homeland security." His rationale was that it "rules out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office".
    He' right, there are still a number of horse stewards that are still out there. Glad to see Bush has learned from his mistakes and is not a power monger who gives jobs to his "friends".
     
  2. Pujo

    Pujo Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I actually agree with Bush on the qualifications issue. Nominations to executive agencies are a presidential prerogative and nowhere does the constitution allow congress to limit who the president can nominate. Congress gets its constitutional check when the Senate votes to confirm or reject a candidate.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>