Signing Statements

A Government Accounting Office review, while avoiding any value judgments, states flatly that the Bush administration "sometimes fails to follow all provisions of laws after President Bush attaches 'signing statements' meant to interpret or restrict the legislation[.]"

Lawmakers who asked the Government Accountability Office to conduct the study said it was further proof that the Bush White House oversteps constitutional bounds in ignoring the will of Congress.

"Too often, the Bush administration does what it wants, no matter the law. It says what it wants, no matter the facts," Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., said Monday. Byrd and House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., requested the report.

Signing statements, in which the president appends bills he is signing into law with statements reserving the right to revise, interpret or disregard provisions on national security and constitutional grounds, have become a major sticking point in the power struggle between Congress and the White House.

Conyers made signing statements the topic of his committee's first oversight hearing after Democrats took over control of Congress in January.

The limited GAO study examined signing statements concerning 19 provisions in fiscal year 2006 spending bills. It found that in six of those cases the provisions were not executed as written.

In one case the Pentagon did not include separate budget justification documents explaining how the Iraq War funding was to be spent in its 2007 budget request.

Inch by inch, step by step, the normalization of government lawbreaking continues.