Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Home » Discuss » Journals » Time for change » Read entry Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
THE UNFULFILLED PROMISE
Posted by Time for change in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu Dec 06th 2007, 05:00 PM
The title of this post is a serious but rhetorical question, as the answer should be obvious. By his actions, Bush has already declared himself dictator. How obvious does he have to be before Congress will act?
I mean that as a serious question. Seriously. Bear with me a minute. I and many other DUers have posted numerous articles advocating impeachment on numerous grounds. In this post I’ll discuss a reason that I’ve touched on many times but never discussed in detail: Bush’s numerous “signing statements”. This is the process whereby he signs a bill passed by Congress (rather than vetoing it), thereby officially making it the law of our land, as specified in our Constitution, but he appends a “signing statement” to it, which re-interprets the law as written by Congress.

Admittedly, there is some legitimate purpose to signing statements, as other presidents have used them in the past. There are sometimes situations where the language of Congress is ambiguous, so perhaps it sometimes makes sense for a president to append his interpretation of the law to the bill when he signs it.

Charlie Savage provides a history of presidential signing statements in his new book, “Takeover – The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy”. He notes that George W. Bush has so far issued more than 1,100 signing statements, in comparison to approximately 600 signing statements by all 42 of his predecessors combined. In fairness to Bush, signing statements have become much more common in recent times, beginning with the Reagan presidency: Reagan issued 95 signing statements in 8 years; Bush’s father issued 232 in 4 years; and Clinton issued 140 in 8 years.

But what is more important than the mere number of signing statements that Bush has issued is their nature and purpose. That’s what I will discuss in this post, using examples from Savage’s book

So, back to the question posed in the title of this post. Consider that question as you read over these examples of George Bush’s signing statements. And just as important, consider whether or not there is much or any substantive difference between declaring himself dictator and issuing hundreds of signing statements similar to the ones described below.

But before I get to the signing statement examples, let’s take a quick look at what our Constitution says about this.


The legislative powers provided in our Constitution

Article 1, Section 1 of our Constitution says:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Section 7 says that the President may veto bills passed by Congress, but that if he doesn’t veto them, or if Congress overrides his veto by a two thirds vote, then the bill “shall become a Law”.

Article II concerns the Executive Branch. It gives the President the power to execute the law. It gives absolutely no power to the president to make laws or to nullify them, except by presidential veto, which may be over-ridden by a two thirds vote of both houses of Congress.

That’s all we need to know in order to interpret whether or not George Bush’s signing statements violated the Constitution which he swore to “preserve, protect, and defend”, and whether or not there is a difference between issuing those hundreds of signing statements and declaring himself a dictator.


11 examples of George Bush’s signing statements

U.S. military intervention in Colombia
Congress enacted several laws (See section on “Citing unitary executive”) prohibiting U.S. troops from engaging in combat in Colombia (in our “War on drugs”) and capped the number of contractors and troops that we could use there.

Bush signing statement response: Only the president, as commander in chief, can place restrictions on the use of US armed forces, so the executive branch will construe the law as advisory in nature.

Oversight of missing reconstruction money in Iraq
Congress named an Inspector General to investigate, among other things, missing billions of dollars that were supposed to go for the reconstruction of Iraqi infrastructure.

Bush signing statement response: “The CPA IG shall refrain from initiating, carrying out, or completing an audit or investigation, or from issuing a subpoena…. (blah blah blah) … which would constitute a serious threat to national security”.

Diverting money from authorized programs to secret ones
Congress passed a law requiring the president to notify Congress before diverting money from authorized programs to secret ones, such as the Bush administration’s secret prison system.

Bush signing statement response: Bush claimed the right to bypass (See “Bush’s Latest Signing Statement”) those provisions of the bill: “I will interpret and construe such provisions in the same manner as I have previously stated in regard to those provisions.”

Use of unconstitutionally collected intelligence
Congress twice passed laws forbidding the use of intelligence that was collected in violation of our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Bush signing statement response: “Only the president (See paragraph 6), as commander in chief, can tell the military whether or not it can use any specific piece of intelligence.”

Congressional torture ban
Congress appended a provision to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which banned torture.

Bush signing statement response: ''The executive branch shall construe (the law) in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief".

Training on the humane treatment of prisoners
Congress passed a law requiring the training of military prison guards in the humane treatment of prisoners.

Bush signing statement response: Bush told the military that he was not obligated to follow this. In fact, the new version of the Army Field Manual removes any reference to Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions with respect to the treatment of detainees.

Reporting on civil liberty issues to Congress
Congress passed a bill requiring the Justice Department to report to Congress the use of wiretaps on U.S. soil, memos outlining new interpretations of domestic spying laws, and various other civil liberties issues.

Bush signing statement response: Bush said that he did not consider himself bound to tell Congress how the Patriot Act powers were being used and that, despite the law's requirements, he could withhold the information if he decided that disclosure would ''impair foreign relations, national security, the deliberative process of the executive, or the performance of the executive's constitutional duties."

Disclosure of scientific information
Congressed passed a law saying that scientific information “prepared by government researchers and scientists shall be transmitted to Congress uncensored and without delay”.

Bush signing statement response: Bush said he could order researchers to withhold information from Congress if he thought its disclosure could impair national security, etc.

Transfer of nuclear technology to India
Congress passed a law prohibiting the transfer of nuclear technology to India if it violated certain international nonproliferation guidelines.

Bush signing statement response: Among several other objections to portions of the law, Bush wrote that “approval of the Act does not constitute my adoption of the statements of policy as U.S. foreign policy."

Minimum qualifications for important FEMA positions
Largely in response to the incompetence with which the response to Hurricane Katrina was handled, Congress passed a law saying that for important FEMA positions the president must nominate a candidate who has “a demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management….”

Bush signing statement response: Bush said that he could ignore those requirements because they “interfered with his power to make personnel decisions”.

Whistleblower protections
On several occasions Congress passed whistle-blower protection legislation.

Bush signing statement response: Bush routinely issued signing statements to whistle blower protections legislation to the effect that he can ignore the requirements. For example, Bush added a signing statement to the Energy Policy Act of 2005 saying that “The president or his appointees will determine whether employees of the Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can give information to Congress."

There are plenty more examples, but these should suffice for the purposes of this post.


A hypothetical conversation between a journalist and a Congressperson

This is a conversation that very much needs to take place and be publicized:

Journalist: If George Bush unilaterally declared himself dictator of our country, do you think that would provide sufficient justification for Congress to begin impeachment hearings?

Congressperson: Of course I do. We can’t allow presidents to declare themselves dictators. That would be the end of our democracy. That’s not even a serious question.

Journalist: Are you generally familiar with the numerous “signing statements” that George Bush has issued during his presidency?

Congressperson: Of course I am.

Journalist: Are you aware that he (describe details of 5 signing statements), thereby effectively nullifying those numerous laws enacted by Congress.

Congressperson: Uh, yes.

Journalist: Well, what’s the difference between doing that and declaring himself dictator?

Congressperson: Let’s not exaggerate this. He doesn’t do that with all the laws that we enact – only some of them.

Journalist: You mean, he only nullifies those laws enacted by Congress which he thinks are important to nullify?

Congressperson: Uh, yeah, he only nullifies some of our laws.

Journalist: So, what’s the difference between that and what a dictator does?

Congressperson: Look, George Bush has not DECLARED himself to be the dictator of our country.

Journalist: So, what’s the difference if he declares himself to be dictator and just being one?

Congressperson: Please don’t waste my time. This is the United States of America! We don’t tolerate dictators here.


Opinion of the American Bar Association on Bush signing statements

In 2006, an American Bar Association Task Force reviewed the Bush administration use of signing statements. The task force was bipartisan and included many prominent Republicans. It unanimously concluded that “President Bush should stop issuing statements claiming the power to bypass parts of laws he has signed”. Specifically, the report took issue with the Bush administration’s ridiculous assertion that the Constitution puts Bush beyond the reach of Congress in military matters and executive branch operations:

The president's constitutional duty is to enforce laws he has signed into being, unless and until they are held unconstitutional by the Supreme Court… The Constitution is not what the president says it is…. The recommendations that we make are an effort to correct practices that, if they continue, threaten to throw this country into a constitutional crisis…


What is Congress waiting for?

George Bush has committed numerous impeachable offenses in addition to his use of signing statements to evade his responsibility to enforce and abide by the laws that Congress enacts. His use of signing statements is no worse than many of his other high crimes and misdemeanors, including lying to Congress and the American people to justify a war of aggression and the routine use of torture.

One advantage of pursuing his signing statements on the road to impeachment is that that particular offense shouldn’t require much of an investigation at all, since it is all a matter of public record. Congress only needs to decide whether or not the President is required by our Constitution to enforce the laws that Congress enacts and abide by them. If Congress doesn’t have enough respect for the laws that it enacts to take the only measure left open to it to ensure that those laws are obeyed, then what are we paying them for?
Discuss (104 comments) | Recommend (+14 votes)
The Unfulfilled Promise
The Unfulfilled Promise of the American Dream: The Widening Gap between the Reality of the United States and its Highest Ideals




Time for change


Notwithstanding the lofty sentiments and purpose of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, the reality of the United States of America did not then – and never has – lived up to its ideal. Our nation remains today a long way from fulfilling the promise implied by those ideals. Yet, our Declaration was a great start, and it has long shone as a beacon of hope for people all over the world.

Throughout our history, while many have striven to close the gap between our highest ideals and the reality of our nation, others have focused on the accumulation of private wealth and power, at the expense of everyone else. In recent decades the latter have gained much ground, leading to increasing imperialism abroad and deteriorating democracy at home, characterized by routine (and legal) bribery of our public officials, the fusion of government and private corporate interests (corporatocracy), a corrupt election system largely in the hands of private corporations, a corporate controlled communications media, and the widespread acceptance of Executive Branch secrecy, routinely justified with little if any questioning, by the magic words “national security”. All of this is rapidly turning our country from the democracy proclaimed at our founding into a plutocracy (government by the wealthy and for the wealthy). The result is the most obscene wealth gap our country has ever known, the highest imprisonment rate in the world, rampant militarism, routine flaunting of international law, the least efficient health care system in the developed world, a pending environmental catastrophe that threatens to destroy the life sustaining forces of our planet, and myriad other problems that threaten to destroy our nation and tyrannize our people.

My new book, The Unfulfilled Promise of the American Dream – The Widening Gap between the Reality of the United States and its Highest Ideals, explores the roots and consequences of the demise of our democracy, and why most Americans have been unable to understand this process or even become aware of it. A good understanding of why and how we have deviated so greatly from the ideals of our nation is the first and necessary step towards getting back on the right track and revitalizing our society.

The book is currently being sold in electronic PDF format and can be purchased at http://www.unfulfilledpromise.com/Buy-the-... for $3.99. It will also soon be available in Amazon Kindle format. DU members who cannot afford to buy the book but would like to read it can pm me with your e-mail address, and I will send you a free PDF copy.

I’ve previously posted on DU a slightly earlier version of the introduction to the book, which is also posted at my site. Here is the Table of Contents, followed by a brief description of the three parts of the book:


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction
Acknowledgements
Prologue – What is Wrong with the United States of America?

Part I – Root Causes of the Impending Demise of American Democracy
Chapter 1 – Legalized Bribery
Chapter 2 – Human Psychological Factors
Chapter 3 – Corporatocracy
Chapter 4 – Corporate Control of Media
Chapter 5 – Corrupt Election System
Chapter 6 – Government Secrecy
Chapter 7 – American Exceptionalism

Part II – A Sampling of Imperialist Actions
Chapter 8 – Slavery and its Legacy
Chapter 9 – Early U.S. Imperialism
Chapter 10 – U.S. Imperialism in Cold War
Chapter 11 – Iraq War and Occupation
Chapter 12 – Afghanistan War

Part III – Consequences
Chapter 13 – Election of George W. Bush
Chapter 14 – War and Imperialism
Chapter 15 – Class Warfare
Chapter 16 – Predator Financial Class
Chapter 17 – Shock Therapy
Chapter 18 – Contempt for Int. Law
Chapter 19 – The “War on Drugs”
Chapter 20 – Climate Change
Chapter 21 – “War on Terror”
Chapter 22 – Health Care
Chapter 23 – Unaccountable government
Chapter 24 – Response to 9/11 Attacks
Epilogue


PART I – Root Causes of the Impending Demise of American Democracy

It is somewhat difficult to separate the causes of our problems from their consequences, since they combine to form a long chain of cause leading to consequence, leading to more consequences, etcetera. Nevertheless, it seems worth while to identify the root causes of our problems, those that occur early in the chain and lead to so many of the tragic consequences we see today. The only chance we have of reversing the demise of our democracy is through addressing and attacking its root causes.

At the top of the list is the systematic bribery of public officials by the powerful corporations (Chapter 1) whom our government is charged with regulating in the public interest. Instead of calling it bribery, we call it “campaign contributions”, but what we call it isn’t as important as what it is. It is hard to fathom how democracy can survive when such a practice is legal and condoned.

Working in tandem with our system of legalized bribery is the nature of the people who inhabit our country. That is not to say that Americans are inherently substantially different than any other people. Human beings are imperfect, and that is probably a major reason why in a world where civilization began more than five millennia ago, the oldest written national framework of government in the world today – the Constitution of the United States of America – is only a little more than two and a quarter centuries old. Chapter 2 explores the roles of basic human needs, authoritarianism, psychological defense mechanisms used to prevent us from perceiving reality as it is rather than as we’d like it to be, and corrupted ideologies in causing us to passively accept the accumulation of power in the hands of ambitious and ruthless individuals who care about little else than expanding their own wealth and power.

When bribery of public officials is tolerated as an inevitable aspect of public life, government inevitably grows close to the wealthy interests that shower it with money in return for legislative and other favors. A malevolent symbiosis grows between the state and corporate power, resulting in rule by an oligarchy that is highly detrimental to the lives of ordinary people (Chapter 3). Using their accumulated wealth and power to manipulate our legislative process, the oligarchy grabs for more and more control of the communications media (Chapter 4) that are used to control the information available to and shape the attitudes of our nation’s people, in pursuit of their own narrow interests.

Since the 1980s an orchestrated campaign has been underway to demonize “big government”, thereby paving the way for private corporate control over more and more functions that were previously deemed intrinsic functions of government. Among those functions is the running of public elections (Chapter 5) – the function that symbolizes democracy perhaps more than any other single function. Consequently, the purging of selected registered voters from our computerized voter rolls has become a routine recurring event throughout much of our country, and without a doubt determined the results of the 2000 – and probably 2004 as well – presidential election. Just as bad, more and more of the counting of votes in our public elections have been turned over to private corporations, which count our votes using electronic machines using secret software to produce vote counts that cannot be verified by anyone.

Bribery, the fusion of government and private interest, fake and biased news, and corrupt elections are not things that government and its corporate allies want us to know about. Consequently, they construct walls of secrecy (Chapter 6) to keep us from obtaining information that sheds light on their activities. The perfect phrase for facilitating this is “national security”. When our government tells us that the “national security” requires that certain things be kept secret from us, the understanding is that to question such a pronouncement is unpatriotic, and to actually attempt to obtain the “secret” information may be treasonous.

But indefinitely maintaining secrets from the American people can be very difficult, because at least some people want to know what their government is up to. So in addition to the formal mechanisms of secrecy, informal mechanisms are constructed (Chapter 7) to keep vital information away from us. One of the primary methods for doing this is to make certain sensitive subjects taboo – that is, to create the widespread belief that discussion of these topics is so outside the bounds of acceptable human discourse that anyone who discusses them should be shunned by society, or worse. The most common issue that falls into this category is any discussion that sheds light on the disparity between American ideals and the reality of life in our country today.


PART II – A Sampling of Imperialist Actions in U.S. History

Notwithstanding the fact that our founding document says that “all men are created equal” and speaks of the inalienable rights of humankind, the United States has throughout its history partaken of massive exploitation of other peoples.

It is estimated that at the time of our birth, 18% of our population was black slaves. In our expansion westwards during the late 18th and 19th centuries, we decimated the original inhabitants of our continent, and often treated them with great cruelty. In 1846 we manufactured an excuse for war with our neighbor Mexico, in which we continued to expand our country westwards and southwards. In 1893 we began our overseas imperialism with the conquest of Hawaii. Our overseas expansion was greatly accelerated in 1898 with our participation in the Spanish-American War, which led to our conquest of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. With our arrival at world superpower status at the end of World War II, we began the Cold War, which led to and served as a rationalization for covert and/or direct military actions against myriad foreign nations over the next 46 years. With the September 11, 2001 attacks on our country, we declared a perpetual “War on Terror”, which served and continues to serve as an excuse to invade and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan, nations that posed no threat to us. We do not know when or if this perpetual war will ever end. We don’t know how many additional imperial conquests it will lead to.

Most Americans don’t think much about all this. Many of these actions are done in secrecy, and the American people don’t find out about them until many years later – or we never find out about them at all. Those that we do know about are spun into the most favorable light, to make them seem benign or even noble.

But these actions come at great costs: in the lives of our soldiers; in the ruined lives of the peoples of the victim countries; in trillions of dollars cost to our people and their future generations; in our international reputation; in anti-American hatred leading to terrorism; and, to our democracy itself. For how can a nation claim to believe in the inalienable rights of humankind specified in its founding document, while making a mockery of that belief in the way it treats other peoples? For that reason alone it is worth while to take a brief look at our long history of imperialist actions.


PART III – Consequences

In the Prologue I give a brief account of what I see as some of the worst and tragic consequences of the root causes that I discuss in Part I – to enable the reader to see where this book is heading. When elections of our public officials are for sale to the highest bidder… when our public officials are so addicted to the “campaign contributions” of their wealthiest constituents that they develop a symbiotic relationship with them… when our communications media are owned and controlled by an oligarchy of wealthy elites… when our citizenry lack the ability to differentiate propaganda from reality… when we allow machines provided by private corporations to count our votes using secret electronic software… then we should expect that the consequences will not be pretty or comfortable for the vast majority of our citizens.

In Part III, I explore those consequences in much greater detail, in the hope that the reader will agree with me that these are very serious problems, and that they must be successfully addressed if our country is ever to fulfill the promise of its ideals, or even make progress in that direction. When enough Americans recognize our problems as problems, stripped of the gloss and spin put on them by our oligarchy, they will rise up and do something about them. Until then there will be no progress, and we are very likely to head in the direction of all the former empires of our planet, ending in chaos, widespread catastrophe, suffering, and ignominy.

Profile Information
Time for change
Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your ignore list
DU Donor DU Donor
12554 posts
Member since Thu Dec 2nd 2004
Silver Spring, MD, US
Male
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
The Usual Suspects
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
StarStar
AlienGirl has passed away
16 recs : By Contrary1
Star
My Forums
Democratic Underground forums and groups from my "My Forums" list.
Random Journal
Random Journal
 
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.