Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cheapdate

(3,811 posts)
50. Maybe so.
Wed Mar 27, 2013, 10:17 PM
Mar 2013

Maybe I've misspoken. I've seen some pretty strong recriminations against the president for signing the bill. The bill was a comprehensive appropriation measure. Of course there will be some provisions in it that we object to. This provision, section 735, is one of them.

But as I've pointed out elsewhere, it's not like this either won or lost the fight over GMOs.

The provision changes the way the Secretary of Agriculture is required to respond to challenges to regulations for "plant pests" under the Plant Protection Act.

Removing the provision is as simple as writing to strike it in a future appropriations bill. Or even better, writing legislation that addresses GMOs directly, rather than relying on the vague and equivocal language of the Plant Protection Act.

Obviously, this would be more difficult with the house under Republican control. But the Senate could take the initiative. And of course the Democrats could take the House in 2014 or 2016.

My point is that excoriating the president for a single objectionable provision in a comprehensive appropriations bill is not realistic, as I see it. Expecting the president to go to the mat over this and shut down the government over it is not realistic.



Let us forever associate the term "poison pill" with "Monsanto" Duer 157099 Mar 2013 #1
I wonder if he could use a signing statement on that part. Autumn Mar 2013 #2
Surely he can do a "Signing Statement" to Strike that part of the Bill? KoKo Mar 2013 #3
I don't know if he can or can't. babylonsister Mar 2013 #6
Not sure if you are being disingenuous here to be critical of the president tritsofme Mar 2013 #7
I did some looking up on signing statements. To me it looks like he could. Autumn Mar 2013 #8
No, he couldn't. tritsofme Mar 2013 #14
That's too bad, this would be a perfect time to use it against those asses who Autumn Mar 2013 #16
True dat. nt cheapdate Mar 2013 #24
That is not ProSense Mar 2013 #13
Um, no. You are conflating a signing statement with a line-item veto. A sigining msanthrope Mar 2013 #17
Thank you. That's an excellent explanation and cleared that up for me. Autumn Mar 2013 #21
That's ProSense Mar 2013 #23
Yep, that's all it took Prosense, a clear simple explanation on signing statements. Autumn Mar 2013 #26
Bush misused the signing statement CitizenPatriot Mar 2013 #34
Reading how Bush used them is almost enough to make one wish Democrats weren't so Autumn Mar 2013 #37
Thank you! Again! nt babylonsister Mar 2013 #38
well they are conflating a lot more than that grantcart Mar 2013 #62
Executive orders cannot override legislation. nt hack89 Mar 2013 #33
Why do we believe he would want to? Puzzledtraveller Mar 2013 #65
Here: ProSense Mar 2013 #4
So is the "Obama is perfect" machine! n-t Logical Mar 2013 #59
Yeah, ProSense Mar 2013 #69
This message was self-deleted by its author Skip Intro Mar 2013 #96
I'm wondering if they put a fracking addendum in, too. Anything to screw us in a crisis. freshwest Mar 2013 #5
No. He doesn't even have the power to close Guantanamo. n/t AnotherMcIntosh Mar 2013 #9
With respect I dont think that is the correct usage of the term "poison pill". rhett o rick Mar 2013 #10
thanks babylonsistah thankfully this monsanto thing is Cha Mar 2013 #11
Would personally like to surround the bastards in Congress condoleeza Mar 2013 #12
Can one of our good Senators (Sanders, Boxer, Franken, Warren) loudsue Mar 2013 #15
With a possible veto sakabatou Mar 2013 #18
He didn't seem to think he would have a problem back in 2008. bvar22 Mar 2013 #19
Thanks for this, bvar22, not that I didn't think babylonsister Mar 2013 #20
For one thing, he could have raised hell from the Bully Pulpit before signing, bvar22 Mar 2013 #25
He's the President and he or his Aides on the Hill didn't know what KoKo Mar 2013 #28
Do you actually ProSense Mar 2013 #44
reality check G_j Mar 2013 #67
Really appreciate your posts here bvar22 MoclipsHumptulips Mar 2013 #83
Oh, I know-- he always "has to" do these things conglomerates want. Marr Mar 2013 #22
The new provisions alter, but do not eliminate cheapdate Mar 2013 #27
You saw bvar22's post with Video from POB...up above? KoKo Mar 2013 #29
Did not. Will look. cheapdate Mar 2013 #30
Saw video. President supports labeling. nt. cheapdate Mar 2013 #31
He supported it then.....but this Monsanto GMO Seeds got into the bill KoKo Mar 2013 #35
Yes, congress passed and the president signed cheapdate Mar 2013 #46
How is it not "wise" to confront our President about any KoKo Mar 2013 #48
I didn't say it was wrong to speak out, cheapdate Mar 2013 #64
Don't hold your breath waiting on Tom Vilsack to "regulate" Monsanto. bvar22 Mar 2013 #74
I know just enough about Tom Vilsack... cheapdate Mar 2013 #90
Do you really believe that we are "just now learning"... bvar22 Mar 2013 #94
"Who is the judge...You?" cheapdate Mar 2013 #102
interesting take on this KT2000 Mar 2013 #58
Yeah, there's this thing called a veto. MrSlayer Mar 2013 #32
The fight over GMO was neither won, nor lost cheapdate Mar 2013 #36
As is your choice. MrSlayer Mar 2013 #39
Hey, babylonsister Mar 2013 #40
cheapdate....I think perhaps you are mischaracterizing what some KoKo Mar 2013 #43
Maybe so. cheapdate Mar 2013 #50
Well we are being told by some "informed sources" that he legally KoKo Mar 2013 #41
Straight and to the point. Le Taz Hot Mar 2013 #57
Which this president has used TWICE in 4 years Doctor_J Mar 2013 #77
Fuck. This. Shit. nt BrotherIvan Mar 2013 #42
I frankly question how much Obama tpsbmam Mar 2013 #45
+1 lunasun Mar 2013 #55
He should have vetoed it. Deep13 Mar 2013 #47
"The problem is that the President does not have line item veto power" No, thats not the problem. cstanleytech Mar 2013 #49
FYI, Here is the actual text of the provision... reACTIONary Mar 2013 #51
I believe that is all one sentence. postulater Mar 2013 #76
Redaction Action reACTIONary Mar 2013 #87
I think your interpretation is spot on. cheapdate Mar 2013 #91
I don't think it is GMOs in general... reACTIONary Mar 2013 #98
It's confusing as f$#k. cheapdate Mar 2013 #100
Much better. postulater Mar 2013 #92
Its a big job... reACTIONary Mar 2013 #99
This is a perfect example of why they create these fake fiscal-crisis situations in the first place arcane1 Mar 2013 #52
The corporations have us by the proverbial balls. The investors goal is to apply pressure. nt raouldukelives Mar 2013 #71
PETITION proverbialwisdom Mar 2013 #53
Let's See Action - Pete Townsend proverbialwisdom Mar 2013 #95
So much pretending in this thread. woo me with science Mar 2013 #54
like the playing cards painting white roses red lunasun Mar 2013 #56
This message was self-deleted by its author Marblehead Mar 2013 #60
I was looking for that, thanks! Puzzledtraveller Mar 2013 #66
have you noticed it is spreading, woo me? Skittles Mar 2013 #79
I actually don't think it's spreading. woo me with science Mar 2013 #81
I'll stick it out but..... Skittles Mar 2013 #82
Unfortunately, woo me with science Mar 2013 #84
sheesh, woo, you're kicking the hope clean out of me Skittles Mar 2013 #85
^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^ Reply #84 nt cbrer Mar 2013 #101
A thread that even dares to come close to putting this president in a positive light BlueCaliDem Mar 2013 #61
I've referenced and linked the OP in two other threads... Hekate Mar 2013 #63
I believe I've seen at least one of them BlueCaliDem Mar 2013 #68
Oh I agree with you there. In fact when I point out facts like cstanleytech Mar 2013 #80
it would be more honest to defend the legislation itself Enrique Mar 2013 #70
DU rec... SidDithers Mar 2013 #72
. Enrique Mar 2013 #73
Speaking of..nt SidDithers Mar 2013 #75
Blame the gop... babylonsister Mar 2013 #78
Why can't the Democrats ever "slip things into bills"... bvar22 Mar 2013 #86
Isn't it funny how that works. woo me with science Mar 2013 #88
KICK UP TO THE TOP. this is important trueblue2007 Mar 2013 #89
It's Obama's DOMA. Safetykitten Mar 2013 #93
Nothing but excuses on this issue. Skip Intro Mar 2013 #97
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Poison pill? Obama Can’t...»Reply #50