Hillary makes promise to curtail presidential power
Bill Clinton and George W. Bush did have one thing in common -- they attempted to expand presidential power through the power of the line item veto. With Clinton, the Supreme Court ruled that it . With Bush, the Congress to approve it. Because the Bush/Clinton dynasty might continue for another eight years, we should at least know where Hillary stands on the issue of line item veto authority.
In an interview with the , although she chose not to address that specific issue, she did promise to "reign in" executive power:
"I think you have to restore the checks and balances and theseparation of powers, which means reining in the presidency," Clintontold the Boston Globe's editorial board.
Although Bush has issuedhundreds of signing statements, declarations that accompany hissignature on bills approved by Congress, Clinton said she would use thestatements only to clarify bills that might be confusing orcontradictory. She also said she did not subscribe to the "unitaryexecutive" theory that argues the Constitution prevents Congress frompassing laws limiting the president's power over executive branchoperations. Adherents to the theory say any president who refuses toobey such laws is not really breaking the law.
"It has been aconcerted effort by the vice president, with the full acquiescence ofthe president, to create a much more powerful executive at the expenseof both branches of government and of the American people," she said.
This is the point in time when newspaper editorial boards begin to think about endorsing a candidate. That was probably why Clinton sat down with them.
Promises, promises!
- The substance of the Hillary Clinton & Line item Veto story is just this:
"In an interview with the Boston Globe's editorial board, ... she chose not to address that specific issue ..."
And as a further observation, - neither the word "promise" nor "vow" came from her mouth, only from headline writers.
Posted by: granny | 2007.10.12 at 12:43 AM