Editor’s Note – The signing statement below was generated by Barack Obama and his staff at the White House and released two days before Christmas. Possibly the one day, more than any other, that anyone could release objectionable or dilatory information so no one would notice, especially the main stream media outlets. Fridays are normally the day to do such things, and this year, that Friday was the beginning of the Christmas holiday.

How convenient, especially when you consider just how ridiculous the arguments are as displayed in that ‘signing statement’. By signing the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012” he effectively turned the entirety of the bill into law, but since it did not agree with his ideology and campaign promises, he attached the statement listed below.

In the statement, he repeatedly raises Constitutional issues that he and his staff feel impedes upon his ability to do his job, and that there are clear issues impinging on the separation of powers between the Legislative and Executive branches.

Again, selective enforcement, this from the “most transparent administration, and fourth best Presidency ever”.

This is demonstrative of every facet of his administration – trot the Constitution out when it serves your purpose, stomp all over it when it does not. If we do a mere surface examination of the past three years he has been in office, its clear that there is a very large disdain for the Constitution except when needed for political means.

If he were so concerned about the ability to do his job, and the separation of powers, why does his DoJ sue states, decide not to sue criminals, and run crazy schemes like Fast & Furious that is still stone-walling Congress. All this and more while his party has yet to pass a budget in the Senate; for over 1,000 days? It is totally disingenuous!

There goes that left-handed signing statement pen - my way!

This bill was passed, under horrible political wrangling, all to keep the government working, but only as he sees fit – ‘rule-of-law’ has no meaning anymore, and this administration and his party just say: “We don’t need no stinking badges!” Everything these people do stretches credulity to its breaking point, and at every juncture, no matter the issue, its politics first, second, third…and its everyone else’s fault!

Statement by the President on H.R. 2055

AJC Blog

By Jamie Durpee

Before President Obama left for Hawaii to join his family on a Christmas vacation, he signed into law a package of budget bills for the current fiscal year – but he also let Congress know that a few provisions would not be observed by his administration.

These are called “signing statements” and have a times been rather controversial – mainly depending on which party is in control of the White House.

In other words, if it is your President, the signing statement is okay – if the other party controls the White House, then signing statements are usually bad.

This latest Obama signing statement has to do with Guantanamo detainees, the deployment of U.S. military forces overseas, restrictions on diplomatic work, the assignemnts of executive branch officials and restrictions on the use of money at the Library of Congress and in other agencies.

Put on your legal hat and sift through this signing statement:

Today I have signed into law H.R. 2055, the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012.” This bill provides the funding necessary for the smooth operation of our Nation’s Government.

I have previously announced that it is the policy of my Administration, and in the interests of promoting transparency in Government, to indicate when a bill presented for Presidential signature includes provisions that are subject to well-founded constitutional objections. The Department of Justice has advised that a small number of provisions of H.R. 2055 raise constitutional concerns.

In this bill, the Congress has once again included provisions that would bar the use of appropriated funds for transfers of Guantanamo detainees into the United States (section 8119 of Division A), as well as transfers to the custody or effective control of foreign countries unless specified conditions are met (section 8120 of Division A). These provisions are similar to others found in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. My Administration has repeatedly communicated my objections to these provisions, including my view that they could, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles. In approving this bill, I reiterate the objections my Administration has raised regarding these provisions, my intent to interpret and apply them in a manner that avoids constitutional conflicts, and the promise that my Administration will continue to work towards their repeal.

The Congress has also included certain provisions in this bill that could interfere with my constitutional authorities in the areas of foreign relations and national security. Section 113 of Division H requires the Secretary of Defense to notify the Appropriations Committees of both Houses of Congress 30 days in advance of “any proposed military exercise involving United States personnel” that is anticipated to involve expenditures of more than $100,000 on construction. Language in Division I, title I, under the headings International Organizations, Contributions for International Peacekeeping Activities, disallows the expenditure of funds “for any United Nations peacekeeping mission that will involve United States Armed Forces under the command or operational control of a foreign national,” unless my military advisers have advised that such an involvement is in the national interest, and unless I have made the same recommendation to the Congress. In approving this bill, I reiterate the understanding, which I have communicated to the Congress, that I will apply these provisions in a manner consistent with my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief.

Certain provisions in Division I, including sections 7013, 7025, 7029, 7033, 7043, 7046, 7049, 7059, 7062, and 7071, restrict or require particular diplomatic communications, negotiations, or interactions with foreign governments or international organizations. Others, including sections 7031, 7037, and 7086, hinder my ability to receive diplomatic representatives of foreign governments. Finally, section 7041 requires the disclosure to the Congress of information regarding ongoing diplomatic negotiations. I have advised the Congress that I will not treat these provisions as limiting my constitutional authorities in the area of foreign relations.

Moreover, several provisions in this bill, including section 627 of Division C and section 512 of Division D, could prevent me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibilities, by denying me the assistance of senior advisers and by obstructing my supervision of executive branch officials in the execution of their statutory responsibilities. I have informed the Congress that I will interpret these provisions consistent with my constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

Additional provisions in this bill, including section 8013 of Division A and section 218 of Division F, purport to restrict the use of funds to advance certain legislative positions. I have advised the Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.

Numerous provisions of this bill purport to condition the authority of executive branch officials to spend or reallocate funds on the approval of congressional committees. These are constitutionally impermissible forms of congressional aggrandizement in the execution of the laws. Although my Administration will notify the relevant committees before taking the specified actions, and will accord the recommendations of such committees appropriate and serious consideration, our spending decisions shall not be treated as dependent on the approval of congressional committees. In particular, section 1302 of Division G conditions the authority of the Librarian of Congress to transfer funds between sections of the Library upon the approval of the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate. I have advised the Congress of my understanding that this provision does not apply to funds for the Copyright Office, which performs an executive function in administering the copyright laws.



December 23, 2011.