Senator slams Bush on 'signing statements'

President Bush's frequent use of so-called signing statements is "unlawful" and "inappropriate," according to Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).

Specter was a guest last Friday on the National Public Radio program Justice Talking, which was recorded in front of a fully packed lecture room in Huntsman Hall.

During his two terms, Bush has attached more signing statements than his predecessors to bills he has signed. The statements are made in order to voice his displeasure with parts or all of the new law.

Students were asked before and after the debate to applaud loudly to ensure that the audience sounded large over the radio.

The program consisted of a debate between former Rep. Mickey Edwards (R-Okla.) and Duke University professor of public policy Christopher Schroeder. The debate was moderated by NPR's Margot Adler. It was followed by an interview with Specter, who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The president should not be able to sign the bill into law and then say he might not follow parts of it, Specter argued.

With a law like the Patriot Act, he said, Congress spends time deliberating over and amending all its aspects.

"When a law is passed, it should be followed," the fifth-term senator said.

Signing statements "are inappropriate, unlawful and unconstitutional," Specter said. "That's all I have against them."

This issue has come to the forefront because President Bush "has issued more signing statements than all his predecessors combined," Edwards said.

All three men disagreed with Bush's contention that this power is integral to national security.

"The president was ramping up the signing statements before 9/11," Schroeder said.

It was the consensus between both debate participants that Bush is overusing this power and disrespecting the Constitution.

"The Constitution is not a peer-reviewed law journal," Edwards said. "He can sign [a bill] or veto it."

Specter has proposed a bill that would give Congress standing in court to challenge the president's use of signing statements.

He characterized Bush's view of a strong executive as "mumbo jumbo unitary power."

One student asked Specter if the American people are not receiving the best of both worlds with the president's signing statements, because the government condemns and does not allow torture, but the signing statements "can allow us to sleep well at night," knowing that it can be used for national-security purposes.

Specter responded with a flat, "No," though he stated after the program that the student's question was

"excellent."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.