You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #15: that is by all means not ALL of them [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. that is by all means not ALL of them
Edited on Sun Jun-11-06 12:05 PM by Sydnie
I posted this statement at a different forum on March 18,2006.

------------

Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents
From the 2006 Presidential Documents Online via GPO Access frwais.access.gpo.gov
DOCIDd16ja06_txt-3

Page 23

Pages 23 72

Week Ending Friday, January 13, 2006

Statement on Signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2006


January 6, 2006

Today, I have signed into law H.R. 1815, the ``National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006.'' The Act authorizes funding for
the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, for military
construction, and for national security-related energy programs.
Several provisions of the Act, including sections 352, 360, 403,
562, 818, and 2822, call for executive branch officials to submit to the
Congress proposals for legislation, including budget proposals for
enactment of appropriations, or purport to regulate or require
disclosure of the manner in which the President formulates
recommendations to the Congress for legislation. The executive branch
shall implement these provisions in a manner consistent with the
President's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive
branch and to recommend for the consideration of the Congress such
measures as the President judges necessary and expedient. Also, the
executive branch shall construe section 1206(d) of the Act, which
purports to regulate formulation by executive branch officials of
proposed programs for the President to direct, in a manner consistent
with the President's constitutional authority to supervise the unitary
executive branch and to require the opinions of heads of executive
departments. In addition, the executive branch shall construe section
1513(d) of the Act, which purports to make consultation with specified
Members of Congress a precondition to the execution of the law, as
calling for but not mandating such consultation, as is consistent with
the Constitution's provisions concerning the separate powers of the
Congress to legislate and the President to execute the laws.
A number of provisions of the Act, including sections 905, 932,
1004, 1212, 1224, 1227, and 1304, call for the executive branch to
furnish information to the Congress on various subjects. The executive
branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the
President's constitutional authority to withhold information the
disclosure of which could impair foreign relations, national security,
the deliberative processes of the Executive, or the performance of the
Executive's constitutional duties.
Section 1222 of the Act refers to a joint explanatory statement of a
committee of conference on a bill as if the statement had the force of
law. The executive branch shall construe the provision in a manner
consistent with the bicameral passage and presentment requirements of
the Constitution for the making of a law.
The provisions in Title XIV in Division A of the Act are identical,
except for a punctuation change in section 1405(b)(1)(B) and revisions
in section 1406, to the corresponding provisions in Title X of Division
A of the Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to
Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act,
2006 (H.R. 2863 of the 109th Congress) (Public Law 109-148). The
statement I issued upon signing H.R. 2863 into law on December 30, 2005,
is incorporated herein by reference insofar as that statement referred
to Title X of Division A of that Act.
George W. Bush
The White House,
January 6, 2006.

Note: H.R. 1815, approved January 6, was assigned Public Law No. 109-
163. This item was not received in time for publication in the
appropriate issue.

Page 24

-----

Funny how that one doesn't appear in the list (from the post on latest page).


I originally posted these here http://o.forums.go.com/abc/primetime/bostonlegal/messag... during a discussion on signing statements in general. You can see that it clearly came from the original link I posted in this thread, but it appears to have been removed now.

:wtf: !!

edited to add - that date doesn't even appear on their list for the year! This was in the week ending Jan 13, 2006, and they have no listing there at all for that date!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -All the signing statements scrubbed from the online database? Sydnie  Jun-11-06 10:13 AM   #0 
  - What are those "public papers" that you speak, grandpa?  robbedvoter   Jun-11-06 10:16 AM   #1 
  - Heh, heh....a sad commentary, but damn, TRUE! NT  MADem   Jun-11-06 10:35 AM   #4 
  - "Well, back in the day, back when there were a thing called glaciers..."  me b zola   Jun-11-06 11:59 AM   #14 
  - it's because the American Bar Ass. is after chimpy for signing statements  Jeffersons Ghost   Jun-11-06 10:18 AM   #2 
  - but they were always available before  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 10:20 AM   #3 
     - I've been doing antiwar OPs with Graphics. you should see how fast...  Jeffersons Ghost   Jun-11-06 10:59 AM   #6 
  - this is potentially huge. May i make a suggestion?  salin   Jun-11-06 10:55 AM   #5 
  - I agree with your suggestion  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 11:10 AM   #9 
  - This may be a long shot, but...  me b zola   Jun-11-06 12:38 PM   #19 
  - It isn't that we can't read them right now...  salin   Jun-11-06 12:51 PM   #22 
  - Yes, when I saw the title of this thread I instantly got an Orwell moment.  Jackpine Radical   Jun-11-06 09:31 PM   #27 
  - I have been doing some investigation at the GPO  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 08:07 PM   #25 
  - Here's a comparison I did last month, using an Air America interview.  Jeffersons Ghost   Jun-11-06 11:05 AM   #7 
  - Here is a good history on signing statements  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 11:09 AM   #8 
  - national security. You can't even ask what now is secret. Because  antifaschits   Jun-11-06 11:21 AM   #10 
  - k&r.  robinlynne   Jun-11-06 11:40 AM   #11 
  - There is a link to them on a new thread. It works. look in "latest".  robinlynne   Jun-11-06 11:42 AM   #12 
  - that is by all means not ALL of them  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 12:02 PM   #15 
     - Knowing what to look for is a big part of the battle.  salin   Jun-11-06 12:24 PM   #17 
     - Thanks for that info  me b zola   Jun-11-06 12:34 PM   #18 
        - Yet, one from Clinton that I had read previously at the other site  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 12:39 PM   #20 
  - Look here  bear425   Jun-11-06 11:45 AM   #13 
  - Lesson: You think it's damning and online, SCREEN CAPTURE is our friend  helderheid   Jun-12-06 10:10 AM   #43 
     - boy, have I learned that lesson this weekend! n/t  Sydnie   Jun-12-06 10:18 AM   #46 
  - K&R nt  lostnfound   Jun-11-06 12:22 PM   #16 
  - I wouldn't put it past them to sanitize the site..I'm sure there is a  w8liftinglady   Jun-11-06 12:44 PM   #21 
  - Rubber stamped by Sam Alieto. nt  Tigress DEM   Jun-12-06 03:41 AM   #36 
  - Cheney's role in Signing Statements  Emit   Jun-11-06 12:51 PM   #23 
  - simply incredible  Greyskye   Jun-11-06 01:35 PM   #24 
  - won't they be on whitehouse.gov somewhere? n/t  AZDemDist6   Jun-11-06 09:17 PM   #26 
  - They have always been available from the  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 10:01 PM   #28 
     - ok that's just odd  AZDemDist6   Jun-11-06 10:20 PM   #29 
     - Has anyone contacted  The_Warmth   Jun-11-06 10:23 PM   #30 
        - It's the weekend ... can't imagine  Sydnie   Jun-11-06 11:26 PM   #32 
  - k&r n/t  Concerned GA Voter   Jun-11-06 10:47 PM   #31 
  - Kicked & recommended  rumpel   Jun-12-06 12:36 AM   #33 
  - Kicking -- please keep this alive! nt  snot   Jun-12-06 01:18 AM   #34 
  - 1984 all over..  Tigress DEM   Jun-12-06 03:40 AM   #35 
  - The Boston Globe did the article on the signing statements. Maybe  mom cat   Jun-12-06 06:37 AM   #37 
  - If you know about them the terrorist will win  Toots   Jun-12-06 07:52 AM   #38 
  - Those who control the past...  greiner3   Jun-12-06 08:00 AM   #39 
  - Kick. Shocking. n/t  myrna minx   Jun-12-06 08:01 AM   #40 
  - I just called Charlie Savage  Sydnie   Jun-12-06 09:14 AM   #41 
  - It's Monday  Heywoodj   Jun-12-06 10:09 AM   #42 
  - Quite interesting!  Sydnie   Jun-12-06 10:17 AM   #45 
  - Kicking.  riderinthestorm   Jun-12-06 10:16 AM   #44 
  - Muthafucka dictating nazi!  lonestarnot   Jun-12-06 10:20 AM   #47 
  - Keep this alive  chill_wind   Jun-12-06 10:43 AM   #49 
  - kick  lonestarnot   Jun-13-06 11:09 AM   #51 
  - THE SIGNING STATEMENTS ARE HERE:  elehhhhna   Jun-12-06 10:38 AM   #48 
     - Thank you!  lonestarnot   Jun-12-06 11:41 AM   #50 
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC