Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TLF

The Cheney Exemption

Recommended Posts

printlogo_default.gif

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

The Cheney Exemption **

 

The White House has had to defend Vice President Cheney's decision to opt out of a presidential order regulating the handling of secret information by the executive branch. Cheney's reasoning: His office is not really part of the executive branch.

 

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino insists that this is a "non-issue," but the vice president's effort to create a separate branch of government for himself has become one, and given congressional Democrats an opening to launch another investigation.

 

In 1995, President Bill Clinton issued an order intended to ensure that classified data was properly labeled and stored within executive-branch agencies, and established an Information Security Oversight Office within the National Archives to ensure that it was.

 

President Bush modified the order in 2003, which, coincidentally or not, was when Cheney's office, which had complied in 2001 and 2002, stopped cooperating with the oversight office and blocked oversight investigators from the vice president's offices altogether in 2004.

 

Following standard procedures, the oversight office appealed to the Department of Justice, where the matter now rests with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Cheney aides - in a hardball manner said to be typical of the vice president's operatives - tried to have the appeals process eliminated. When that failed, they tried to have the oversight office eliminated altogether.

 

Bush is apparently OK with his vice president ignoring a presidential order. Cheney's rationale is that because under the Constitution he is president of the Senate - with the sole duty of breaking ties - he is actually a member of the legislative, not the executive, branch.

 

Cheney might not want to push this line of reasoning too far. The Constitution gives the Senate and House - the legislative branch to which the vice president says he belongs - complete latitude in determining their rules and punishing offenders.

 

Does the Republican vice president really want the Democratic-run Senate laying down the rules for his office? On the other hand, with this administration you never know.

 

 

 

**another website i found this article on attriubuted it to Dale McFeattures, who is apparently an editorial writer for Scripps Howard News Service, which would make sense since the EW Scripps folks own the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
printlogo_default.gif

Tuesday, June 26, 2007

The Cheney Exemption **

 

The White House has had to defend Vice President Cheney's decision to opt out of a presidential order regulating the handling of secret information by the executive branch. Cheney's reasoning: His office is not really part of the executive branch.

 

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino insists that this is a "non-issue," but the vice president's effort to create a separate branch of government for himself has become one, and given congressional Democrats an opening to launch another investigation.

 

In 1995, President Bill Clinton issued an order intended to ensure that classified data was properly labeled and stored within executive-branch agencies, and established an Information Security Oversight Office within the National Archives to ensure that it was.

 

President Bush modified the order in 2003, which, coincidentally or not, was when Cheney's office, which had complied in 2001 and 2002, stopped cooperating with the oversight office and blocked oversight investigators from the vice president's offices altogether in 2004.

 

Following standard procedures, the oversight office appealed to the Department of Justice, where the matter now rests with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Cheney aides - in a hardball manner said to be typical of the vice president's operatives - tried to have the appeals process eliminated. When that failed, they tried to have the oversight office eliminated altogether.

 

Bush is apparently OK with his vice president ignoring a presidential order. Cheney's rationale is that because under the Constitution he is president of the Senate - with the sole duty of breaking ties - he is actually a member of the legislative, not the executive, branch.

 

Cheney might not want to push this line of reasoning too far. The Constitution gives the Senate and House - the legislative branch to which the vice president says he belongs - complete latitude in determining their rules and punishing offenders.

 

Does the Republican vice president really want the Democratic-run Senate laying down the rules for his office? On the other hand, with this administration you never know.

 

 

 

**another website i found this article on attriubuted it to Dale McFeattures, who is apparently an editorial writer for Scripps Howard News Service, which would make sense since the EW Scripps folks own the post.

 

"Rock, paper, scissors, Cheney."

 

http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml?ml_video=89059&ml_collection=&ml_gateway=&ml_gateway_id=&ml_comedian=&ml_runtime=&ml_context=show&ml_origin_url=/shows/the_colbert_report/videos/most_recent/index.jhtml&ml_playlist=&lnk=&is_large=true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting question: it seems so stupid for the Vice President to say he isn't part of the executive branch, but his other position is in the Senate (clearly in the legislative branch). The constitution doesn't seem to specify exactly where the VP position resides. While I dislike Cheney, even a stupid person can raise a thought provoking question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The position of the creation of the office of the Vice President in Article II should be evidence enough of framers' intent...not to mention the fact that the word "president" is in the name and not followed by pro tempore or some other Latin phrase...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True: I agree with you that the VP should be part of the executive branch, but I read a good quote from some big name constitutionalist who called it an "Ineresting fusion position" Just because it can be argued either way doesn't mean that Cheney shouldn't follow either set of rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this administration has proved more than anything...is that the Constitution doesn't mean dick unless the people are willing to defend it. Bush (and more than anyone, Cheney/Rove), knows this, and uses it to his advantage. America lacks the moral integrity or courage to live up to its mandate as a people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What this administration has proved more than anything...is that the Constitution doesn't mean dick unless the people are willing to defend it. Bush (and more than anyone, Cheney/Rove), knows this, and uses it to his advantage. America lacks the moral integrity or courage to live up to its mandate as a people.

 

Very, very true; but even when someone is doing something illegal / stupid they can touch of a deep debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...