quote:WASHINGTON - For anyone who took fifth-grade social studies, how legislation turns to law always seemed pretty simple: The House passes a bill, the Senate passes the same bill, and the president signs it.
But last month, Washington threw all that old-fashioned civics stuff into a tizzy when President Bush signed into law a bill that never passed the House. The bill -- in this case, a major budget-cutting measure that will affect millions of Americans -- became a law because it was ``certified'' by the leaders of the House and Senate.
After stewing for weeks, Public Citizen, a legislative watchdog group, sued Tuesday to block a law that aims to cut $40 billion over five years, charging that Bush and Republican leaders of Congress flagrantly violated the Constitution when the president signed it into law knowing that the version that cleared the House was $2 billion different from the Senate's version.
The issue is bizarre, with even constitutional scholars saying they could not think of any precedent for the journey the budget bill took to becoming a law. Republicans are evoking an obscure Supreme Court ruling from the 1890s to suggest that a bill does not actually have to pass both chambers of Congress to become law.
...and why are Republicans backing him up on this?
[ April 27, 2006, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: Nato ]
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As this is essentially month-old news, it's pretty clear the Democrats haven't been putting up too much of a fight either. Bleh.
Posts: 1592 | Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If a runner doesn't respect a hurdle, then they crash into it and fall to the ground. It wasn't a law, it was the S. 1932 - Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 that was being discussed, not that Jonathan Weisman is completely biased or anything...
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The story came out a week ago, and there's almost no details to it. It's hard to make any kind of judgement on the issue, or about whose fault/who broke the law in this case. I wouldn't be surprised if Bush tried to go around Congress on it, but at the same time, I won't jump on the "Blame Bush" bandwagon in this case until I see all the facts.
The nice thing about Bush, is that he's usually honest when he tries to circumvent the law. He just treats it with such disdain and surprise, that he makes it look like it's either not a law, or that it shouldn't be a law, and that should be enough to make the issue go away.
I await more information.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The version of this on Public Citizen's website is more detailed and less alarming.
Basically, there is what amounts to a two-character difference between the House and Senate versions of the two bills, and that difference may well have been a clerical error. Or deliberate malfeasance by a clerk.
Either way, nobody noticed the difference and the two chambers thought they were passing the same exact bill.
I imagine the clerk responsible is in a bit of hot water.
Stuff like this can be corrected after the fact. Dumb mistakes happen all the time in legislation. The Transportation Bill had a bunch of errors where, if implemented, would've eliminated entire programs that the bill repeatedly gives responsibilities to. Hey, really, people make mistakes.
Ultimately, given that "document compare" is a feature of word processors everywhere, I suspect this kind of mistake will be looked for in the future. But it really doesn't seem like that big a deal.
Public Citizen is fighting it in the courts to make a point, I think. It really doesn't look like there was any deliberate malfeasance on the part of any elected officials here.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I watched a press conference Nancy Pelosi gave on this issue at about the time it was happening. She admitted that what happened was very close to what Bob says, but was still planning to take (report) the Republican leaders to the House Ethics Committee for the transgression. I doubt she actually has.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Developing story coming from the top House Democrats. They are filing a lawsuit against Bush and his administration to prevent implementation of the "Budget Deficit Act of 2005." That's the legislation which Bush signed even though the House and Senate passed different versions (basically because the Republican illegally changed the legislation).
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
