Bush signing statement on US-India nuclear deal erases Congressional restrictions

[deminks]

Hours after signing an agreement yesterday on cooperation with India on civilian nuclear technology, President George W. Bush issued a "signing statement" insisting that the executive branch was not bound by terms of the agreement approved by the House of Representatives and Senate, RAW STORY has learned.

The "Henry Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act" was signed following a year of difficult negotiations with the Congress over the terms of the agreement. The agreement between the US and India itself took years to achieve. Critics of the agreement warned that it would send a bad message to states like Iran who may be on the threshold of a nuclear weapon capability. They also worry that by making it possible for the South Asian giant to access larger supplies of nuclear fuel for use in its civil nuclear power plants, the deal will free up India's small existing uranium supplies for use by its military.

But President Bush was unfazed in explaining his reasons for supporting the agreement, first and foremost emphasizing the benefits for the bilateral relationship between the US and India. He also used the legislation as an opportunity to promote the value of the use of nuclear energy by both states. Moreover, he reasoned "the bill will help keep America safe by paving the way for India to join the global effort to stop the spread of nuclear weapons."

However, a reading of the presidential signing statement which came later in the day made unclear the strength of some of those commitments, especially those made to Congress. In all, President Bush took exception to nine full sections of the bill approved by Congress.

(SNIP)

Next, President Bush said that a control placed by Congress on transfers to India of items that would run afoul of Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines "unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to an international body," and he therefore considered the section "advisory" in nature.


http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Bush_signing_statement_seeks_to_erase_1219.html

[Donnachaidh]

1. IMPEACH this MF NOW!

This arrogant little fascist needs a bitch-slapping in PUBLIC.

[mattclearing]

2. Funny...most of the world, and Congress no doubt, consider Bush advisory in nature.

And don't even get me started on his unconstitutionally delegated legislative power. Fuck him.

[madokie]

3. damn damn damn

[rodeodance]

4. "Moreover, he reasoned "----this is the laugh---that Jr has reasoning

powers in his little mind!

[bryant69]

5. Those signing statements have to be investigated

As soon as congress gets in session - they can't be legal.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[screembloodymurder]

6. IMPEACH THE S.O.B. !

If the dems don't act, we need to.

[Norquist Nemesis]

7. "and to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend

the Constitution of the United States"

Must be that his "ability" factor is in the negative numbers. It's the only explanation I can fathom that Congress gives him a pass time, after time, after time, after time...
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[windbreeze]

8. and yet, and yet.....

we attacked Iraq supposedly because Saddam was attempting to go nuclear, and are considering attacking Iran for the same reason(but on the other hand, not N.Korea)....Saudi wants nuclear, do we have any doubts they will get what they want??? so could someone please explain to me...how it's right for one country and not the next to have nuclear abilities, for whatever reason??? and why ONE MAN in the whole world gets to make that decision??? shouldn't all the neighbors in the region have some say???

I want to know who the brains are behind the fool in the WH? because I do not for one minute believe the guy in charge is smart enough to come up with all these signing statements on his own...I want to know WHO is really running this country...and WHAT they are after? a DICTATORSHIP???
Maybe someone who understands the particular language of them, should be investigating all the pres. signings...see if they can find the purpose for them...and EXPOSE it...before HE HAS ALL THE POWER....he has emasculated the Congress enough...
wb

[Double T]

9. I'm tired of living under a dictatorship..........

January 2007 is going to be a GOOD month.

[originalpckelly]

10. Where in the US Constitution does it say George Bush can send nuclear...

technology to India?

Isn't that unconstitutional?

Oh, and there is a part of the US Constitution which specifically allows treaties to be signed, and since this is a treaty, the little fucker is wrong.

[OneBlueSky]

11. Bush is not bound by ANYTHING except his own warped perspective . . .

on how things are and how they should be . . . the man needs to be impeached before he causes irreversible damage to the nation and the planet . . .

[spanone]

12. The new Congress should dump this signing statement shit ASAP or they have no balls.

And their policies are useless.