- Ann Coulter takes up ‘Mitt Romney for President’ chant again
- Mount Everest avalanche kills a dozen Sherpa guides
- Vice principal saved from South Korean sinking ferry found hanged
- ‘I Am Alive’ app gains popularity in terror-ravaged Lebanon
- Gun giveaways gain popularity among Republican candidates
- S.C. hospital worker slapped with $525 federal fine for refilling $0.89 soda
- Teen from ‘Jihad Jane’ plot becomes youngest ever to serve time on U.S. terror charges
- Iranian woman forgives son’s killer at the gallows
- Nebraska principal sorry for ‘don’t tattle’ flier
- Illinois readies to spend $100M for Obama museum in Chicago
Obama vows earmark reform
President Obama on Wednesday joined House Democrats in promising to reel in pork-barrel spending, then defied his party’s Capitol Hill leaders by saying he’d ignore parts of the $410 billion catchall spending bill in his first signing statement, a technique that he criticized the Bush administration for using to sidestep congressional authority.
Mr. Obama signed the spending bill in private, calling it last year’s business, but publicly declared that from now on, he will hold Congress to a higher standard on spending and will insist on reducing pet projects known as earmarks, which came to define the massive spending bill in public opinion.
“This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability,” Mr. Obama said, calling the spending bill “imperfect.”
His coordinated his anti-pork efforts with House Democrats, who announced their own rules to cut back on earmarks, but their joint efforts exposed a rift with senators, who stopped short of endorsing the proposed measures.
In a written statement, the top four Senate Democrats responded to the president’s call for more earmark reform by highlighting past reforms and making vague promises to do more in the future, while the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee said they will adopt their own rules to weed out bad projects.
“We appreciate the president’s leadership in ensuring taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly and with accountability. We have implemented reforms that go a long way toward achieving the accountability and transparency we all agree is necessary, and we look forward to working with President Obama and our colleagues in Congress to explore additional reforms,” the statement from Democratic leaders said.
The president, who earlier this week criticized President Bush for abusing signing statements, issued the first one of his administration Wednesday as he signed the $410 billion bill. In the statement, Mr. Obama carved out five areas in which he said the bill restricted the president’s authority under the Constitution to negotiate on international affairs, interfered with his ability to control his staff and required him to get pre-approval from Congress.
Mr. Obama defended his first signing statement, saying, “It is a legitimate constitutional function” to raise objections based on the Constitution. He said Mr. Bush erred by issuing statements objecting to matters simply on the basis of policy.
Still, Mr. Obama issued his first signing statement earlier in his term than his predecessor. Mr. Bush’s first statement, on March 20, 2001, was an innocuous thanks to Congress, while his first one questioning constitutionality was issued on May 24, 2001, more than four months into his term.
Together with the $787 billion stimulus spending bill that Mr. Obama signed last month, he has now signed nearly $1.2 trillion in spending and tax cuts into law in his little more than 50 days in office. In addition, he has proposed a $3.6 trillion budget for next year.
The president didn’t answer a reporter’s shouted question early in the day about why he was signing the bill in private.
“Some things are signed in public, and some aren’t,” his spokesman, Robert Gibbs, told reporters later.
Republicans are determined to revive their image as the party of fiscal restraint, and they hammered the bill’s nearly 9,000 earmarks costing $12.8 billion. About 40 percent of the earmarks, however, were requested by Republicans.
House Republican leaders scoffed at the earmark reform proposal, saying a veto of the pork-laden omnibus would have sent a stronger message.
By Tammy Bruce
Team Obama's bizarre behavior helps Gitmo terrorists foil justice
- Harry Reid blasts Bundy ranch supporters as 'domestic terrorists'
- CBO shows it's Paul Ryan 4, Obama 0 on budget targeting
- PRUDEN: When a bored president just 'mails it in'
- Joe Biden's biggest gaffe: VP blowing his 2016 head start
- Inside China: Marine's comment on islands draws sharp Chinese response
- BOLTON: A 'three-state solution' for Middle East peace
- With pot and e-cigarettes, Big Tobacco is just waiting to inhale emerging markets
- Golden Hammer: Easter candy bitter taste for taxpayers?
- Obama taunts GOP, takes nationally televised victory lap on Obamacare
- Atheists rush to stage Easter display: 'Jesus Christ is a myth'
Top 10 handguns in the U.S.