Okay, I know there's a lot of politics here, but try to look at this objectively. Assuming the complaint is correct, Bush signed into law legislation that was different in the House and Senate. I'm not fully sure of the implications -- but clearly our government has to honor the Constitution. (Bradblog by the way is a pretty reliable liberal site that focuses mostly on election issues.) http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00002743.htm "On February, 8 at 3:43 p.m.," the complaint alleges, Bush signed a bill that "never was passed by the United States House of Representatives." The difference in the language of the House and Senate bills, is a clause requiring Medicare to cover rent for "certain durable medical equipment." The version of the bill pased by the House requires payments for 36 months. The Senate version requires payments for only 13 months. The difference in the cost of the federal outlays for the two different versions is said to be approximately $2 billion. The two houses of Congress were never able to pass a joint version of the bill, and yet, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) and President Pro Tem of the United States Senate, Ted Stevens (R-AK), "signed a statement attesting that the bill signed by the President had been passed by both the United States House and the United States Senate."