June 22, 2007

White House refuses to say if VP is in executive branch

Reporters finally pushed the White House today on the Vice President’s belief that his office is some kind of fourth branch of government — not executive, not legislative, not accountable to anyone. WH spokesperson Dana Perino’s responses were almost comical.

Q: What do you make of what congressman Waxman referred to as “absurd,” which was the Vice President’s contention that his office is not part of the executive branch?

PERINO: What I think, as I said, I think that is an interesting constitutional question that people can debate. What I think is absurd is —

Q: Would you agree with his contention?

PERINO: What I think is absurd —

Q: Hang on a second. Do you agree with his contention?

PERINO: What I think is absurd is Chairman Waxman asserting some sort of authority over the president in regarding [sic] an executive order, of which he is the sole enforcer.

Q: Would you agree with the contention that the office of the Vice President is not part of the executive branch?

PERINO: What I know — and I am not a lawyer and this is an interesting legal question that legal scholars can debate and I’m sure you’ll find plenty of them inside the Beltway — is that the Vice President has a unique role in our United States government. He is not only the Vice President of the United States, but in that role he is also the President of the Senate. I will go ahead, I will let that debate be held, but what I’m answering questions on, in regards to this morning, is Chairman Waxman’s accusations about this small provision and going back and reading the E.O. and realizing that the President did not intend to have the Vice President treated any differently than himself, and remembering that the executive order is enforced solely by the president of the United States. I think this is a little bit of a non-issue.

So, the problem here is that Waxman believes the Bush administration should enforce its own rules? That’s “absurd”?

Update: Just to flesh this out a little, this speaks to just how radical a White House we’re dealing with here. Forget right and wrong, the Bush gang wants to debate the plain text of Article II.

It gets back to a point I raised a couple of weeks ago. When I worked at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, it was frustrating to debate rivals in the religious right, not because they held competing opinions, but because they accepted a different reality. I would note that the Constitution separates church from state. They’d say, “No, it doesn’t.” I’d say the Founding Fathers intentionally created a secular Constitution. They’d say, “No, they didn’t.”

The same thing here. The Constitution establishes the Vice Presidency in Article II, which, you guessed it, created the executive branch. But the White House, known for creating its own reality, refuses to acknowledge that which has never been controversial.

I particularly enjoyed Perino’s suggestion that the executive order for the executive branch included a “small provision.” In other words, the Bush gang might follow the “big” provisions, but those “small” ones are optional. Please.

Perino’s right, enforcing executive orders does fall under the president’s purview. But therein lies the point — Waxman is pointing out that this White House is ignoring its own rules, and it’s asking the appropriate federal agency to investigate. Cheney is responding by a) holding himself out as a fourth branch of government; and b) trying to eliminate that agency altogether.

Stick it in a time capsule, folks. Future generations won’t believe it.

Second Update: Nico adds that in the same briefing, Perino stated definitively that Cheney was “complying with all the rules and regulations regarding the handling of classified material.” But when questioned how she knew that Cheney was in compliance, Perino said it was a “good question” and admitted she isn’t “positive” that he is in compliance.

 
Discussion

What do you think? Leave a comment. Alternatively, write a post on your own weblog; this blog accepts trackbacks.

26 Comments
1.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 2:57 pm, dguzman said:

He’s in the Corporate branch, CB! I bet his email is something like
bigdick’s_a_billionnaire@halliburton.gov

He is the president of the United Corporation of America!

2.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:02 pm, just bill said:

“So, the problem here is that Waxman believes the Bush administration should enforce its own rules?”

and we all know how well that’s worked out so far…….

3.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:06 pm, Swan said:

White House refuses to say if VP is in executive branch

That is so, so crazy

4.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:21 pm, Anne said:

Well, the answer will eventually be that since Bush issued the order, his decision on what parts of it will or won’t be followed is nothing more than an informal modification of the order.

And then it won’t matter – to them – whether the VP is or is not part of the executive branch.

5.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:34 pm, bjobotts said:

The real point is that congress allows Cheney to continue to do this crap. He refuses to be held accountable by anyone and so he comes up with technicalities meant to confuse, impede, and block oversight making arguments where none should exist just to disrupt and create chaos.
This man should not even be allowed to hold public office much less be America’s vice president.. He is the poster boy for impeachment.
Ask Perino about Cheney’s ridiculous claim and he attacks Waxman…..the mind reels.

6.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:36 pm, AtlantaKaren said:

Enough already. It’s time to openly acknowledge that Dick Cheney is mentally ill. These press conferences and the parsing of the WH’s statements is like something from Caligula.

7.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:39 pm, Goldilocks said:

This little snippet from the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, J. William Leonard adds an interesting twist to the tale:

“If the OVP is not considered an entity within the executive branch, I am concerned that this could impede access to classified information by OVP staff, in that such access would be considered a disclosure outside the executive branch.”

So, the Vice President’s contention that his office is not part of the executive branch would automatically render the actual executive branch culpable of disclosing state secrets to an inappropriate recipient in violation of national security regulations. Nice.

8.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:39 pm, JKap said:

The Dana Perino model of the White House spokes-robot says it all right here:

The point of Chairman Waxman’s letter yesterday regarded the small portion of an executive order of which the president is the sole enforcer and of which he did not intend for the president (sic) to be treated separately from himself.

Apparently she has a Freudian glitch in her programming.

9.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:44 pm, Bill Selznick said:

Talk about creating your own reality. Basically in Bush-World the U.S. Constitution is what they say it is.

Here’s the best part of Article II:

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

10.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:46 pm, Marc said:

Students, teachers and schools are held accountable under NCLB to confirm that the three branches of government are the Legislative, Executive and Judicial, and that the VP is part of the Executive Branch. Only someone incredibly ignorant or willfully corrupt would state otherwise.

11.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:49 pm, The Next to Last Pope said:

None of this should surprise anyone. When it comes to the Constitution, “No, it doesn’t” and “No, they didn’t” have been the guiding principles of this Administration from the start. Too bad we don’t have a two-party system – if we did, the other party could do something about this when they held a majority in Congress.

12.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 3:53 pm, Jamie Cole said:

How hard is it for the press to ask incisive questions such as:

Dana, if the Vice President is not bound this executive order, why did the VP seek to abolish the agency requesting his compliance?

Dana, if the Vice President is not boud by this executive order, why did the VP follow it in the past?

Dana, if the Vice President is not part of the executive branch, why did he claim executive privilege in the past?

Dana, why is Tony Snow not here? Is this too embarrassing even for him to address?

13.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 4:01 pm, nitpicker said:

Hey kids, here’s today’s installment of “Simple Answers to Interesting Constitutional Questions“!

14.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 4:16 pm, Alibubba said:

“I think this is a little bit of a non-issue.” — Dana Smarm

Non-issue, my ass! Are these vermin going to be allowed to continue to use the Constitution as toilet paper? What he hell does it take to get congress’ attention — a military coup d’ tat, with tanks rolling down the Mall?

Maybe the Democrats will consider a non-binding resolution that Americans should obey the law, if convenient. Hell, that should be their new slogan: “Thank you for not violating the Constitution. Have a nice day.”

15.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 4:18 pm, Racer X said:

Goddam fucktard Democrats. WTF will it take to draw up articles of impeachment?

Jesus.

16.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 4:20 pm, kevo said:

Okay, I’ll grant Cheney his argument. I now have only one observation: Dick, you are not subject to Executive oversight, then you are also not subject to Executive privilege. Let’s have your records, Dick, so we can render deep paper cuts over your imbecile interpretations. Dick, you’re a Dick! -Kevo

17.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 4:28 pm, The answer is orange said:

I am not a lawyer and this is an interesting legal question that legal scholars can debate

Translation: This is booooring, can we like, talk about all the schools that have been painted in Iraq?

Fine Perino. Some legal scholars believe all high-ranking officials in corrupt facist governments should receive the same punishment as the leaders, even if it includes being fed to crocodiles. Others disagree. Now you can either answer the fucking question or bob around in this stretch of croc infested water while the legal scholars hold a debate over whether you should be in there or not.

18.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 4:46 pm, PMZd said:

AtlantaKaren might be right. Recall Lawrence Wilkerson saying that Cheney became a different person after 9/11. And some of the VP’s ideas (the 1% doctrine) and actions (insisting that al Qaeda and Iraq are linked despite all evidence to the contrary and other refusals to dwell in reality) sound like they’re out of Dr. Strangelove. Usually I start laughing but then remember these insane and mentally deficient people are in charge of the very powerful US of A.

19.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 6:34 pm, Ron Chusid said:

While there’s been lots of buzz on this the last couple of days, there were actually blog report of Cheney’s claim back in February.

Steve has a good point about the conservatives living in a different reality with a different Constitution than that written in our world. Among other differences, while our Bill of Rights has ten amendments, the Conservative Bill of Rights is limited to the second.

More at Liberal Values:
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=1730

20.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 6:36 pm, Steve said:

The solution to this is simple. Either the WH acknowledges that OVP is part of the executive—based solely upon the facts that it is neither (1) part of the Legislative, nor (2) part of the Judicial—or the House of Representatives immediately enacts defunding of OVP.

You pull the plug on OVP—and Pelosi couold conceivably become second-in-command after the President, AND President Pro Tem of the Senate. How many ReThug Senators would care to have the Dem-controlled House of Representatives presiding over their sessions—with the power to break a tie vote? How many would want Pelosi to be the deciding factor for bringing in “the Nuclear Option,” thereby effectively rendering the entire GOP Senate causus “impotent?”

The GOP needs to walk carefully on this particular piece of thin ice….

21.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 8:59 pm, Monty said:

Article II

Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows….
.

I’m willing to bet the OVP will argue that Article II doesn’t explicitly claim the Vice President is a member of the executive. (i.e. “It’s open to interpretation and we interpret it this way,” etc)

22.
On June 22nd, 2007 at 9:37 pm, Bonnie said:

The easy solution: Take all Federal monies from that office. Make Dick the Dick pay his own salary, pay his staff, pay for the use of the house and offices out of his own pocket. Make him pay for all his travel, etc. Why should the taxpayers pay for an entity that has no oversight?

23.
On June 23rd, 2007 at 2:43 am, Jane E. Schneider said:

Bush must have issued a signing statement on his executive order.

24.
On June 23rd, 2007 at 12:01 pm, ET said:

I have to wonder if the White House press corp thinks Perino is as big an idiot as I do. Everytime she opens her mouth when confronted with yet another eye rolling situation she proceeds to demonstrate that she is in completely over her head. Tony Snow is bad enough. but Perino is just painful. If the White House was smart (yes that was a joke) and if they could find someone (no small feat considering) they would replace her.

25.
On June 23rd, 2007 at 6:35 pm, Kalu said:

If the Vice President is part of the Senate as he says, they should hit him with a little of Article I, Section 5:

“Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.”