The Boston Globe writes up a claim by the administration to overrule 750 laws, both foreign and domestic, a move predicted by this blog over and over again.
I still fail to understand on what grounds the administration feels the power to reach this far. Certainly the political capital doesn’t exist. If Congress flips in 06 (becomming more possible every day), it could quite seriously backfire. It is an intellectual fervor - one that starts with the Project for a New American Century and extends through the President’s governing style. It is philosophical, not intentionally evil, just philosophical. It is, however, a philsophy that must be balanced.
Power corrupts.
Unfortunately, this administration is in the habit of wholesale power grabbing whereby they change the rules first and then present the argument to provide the authority for the already existing outcome. When opponents of this administration assert that this backdoor approach is a pattern and practice, in light of numerous examples, it becomes increasingly difficult to ignore their argument. With this constant chiseling away at the delicate yet deliberate balance intended by the founders of our governmental system, one is left in doubt as to either the degree of Constitutional understanding or its disregard driven by the desire to dictate predetermined deviations.
The rationale for any necessary expansion of executive authority is undermined by the means by which this administration proceeds to obtain it. Such practice has the potential to make all future exchanges between the Congress and the President rife with skepticism. For these reasons, this is a failed policy strategy wholly entrenched in the Bush style of act first, defend vigorously, discuss when forced, and lastly compromise and co-opt the solution when defeated. For a President who fashioned himself as a protégé of Ronald Reagan, he has ironically become the purveyor of policies that Ronald Reagan characterized as requiring a strategy of ‘trust but verify’. Sadly, the cold war that pitted America against the Soviet Union has been replaced by an increasingly divisive internal cold war. History will ultimately determine if the America envisioned by our forefathers prevailed.
more observations here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
Er.. since foreign laws have no standing in the United States, why should this be a problem?
As t domestic laws, I guarantee that without investigating the President’s legal argument, you will not understand it. This is a surprise?
I have no problem with the idea that some laws may need revising in the 21st century. My problem is that Bush is doing to national security policy the same thing the Iowa legislature did to TouchPlay: he picked the result he wanted and begged legal scholars to come up with a reason that didn’t involve publically changing the law. And when that happens, the political pressure that is supposed to hold the democratic nature of the republic together falls apart.