what will Dems do about bush SIGNING statements? hold him accountable for

[msongs]

following the constitution, which says Bush has 2 choices, implement the legislation or VETO it?

bush can sign all he wants but if he fails to implement legislation he did not veto, he is violating his oath and
the law.

what has any member of the new dems majority said about this, if anything?


Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Ringo84]

1. Crack down on him

We're either going to have a Presidency or a Monarchy. If the Democrats we elected into office are worth the vote we used voting for them, they will eradicate Duh-bya's "signing statements" PDQ.
Ringo

[Lindacooks]

2. That should be one of the first things taken care of.

It's worse than the line item veto. Chimp has to be forced to stop declaring himself King.

[madokie]

5. just start erasing them as he signs them I say

who gave him the power of a king anyway, dick cheney, alberto, waterboard boy gonzelas :shrug:

[Ignacio Upton]

3. Pass a law making it illegal for him to do signing statements

...And see if he signs that into law with a signing statement.

[Bear down under]

4. and while you're at it,

Repeal the Military Tribunals Act (the torture/no habeas corpus act) and the Patriot Act. And why not the "authorisation to use force in Iraq" act too? Isn't the power to wage war vested in the Congress?

[Patsy Stone]

6. I asked that earlier.

First, I don't think they'll let him get away with that on the new bills, but what about the old ones? Do they have to pass a law nullifying them, or vote on each one separately?

[Generator]

7. Time will tell

You are not the only one whose thought of this. If the Congress doesn't challenge the signing statements, and Bush refuses to enact the laws, what will happen? (THIS has already happened, with budget bills, and legislation outlawing torture) It will be a Democrat in name only congress. But CONYERS will be on the case. Frankly, he's the only thing that has kept me from giving up hope.