Presentment Clause

464 Words2 Pages
The Presentment Clause, which is in the Constitution, outlines how a bill can become a law. This clause is extremely important in two ways to signing statements. First, the president can inform Congress that the bill has to be altered in a specific way. Second, vetoing and defining one’s view are two different arguments. This is especially important if the president’s interpretation of the bill causes him to view the bill as unconstitutional. However, if the rest of the bill is necessary and constitutional, it should be implemented. John Elwood, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, wrote a statement that clarified the Constitutionality of the statements. While the critics say that it is unconstitutional due to the fact that it is changing…show more content…
Therefore, the argument that signing statements propel tyranny is flawed. Through signing statements, the modern presidents are respecting the founding father’s wishes for a safe country and a checked government. Furthermore, it is a difficult position for a president to be in when he has to veto a law. It has even been said that it is political suicide for a president. While it is horrible for a president, the law will typically not pass with the required amount of votes. This means that the provisions or protection that law would offer would be of no benefit. For example, in 1830, Andrew Jackson clarified how he wanted a spending bill to be spent. While the bill detailed where the road construction was to be, Jackson clarified where the boundaries were. This example does not have to deal with how to interpret the constitution, yet it is an example of what signing statements have done to clarify bills. It would have been ridiculous to veto the bill. On a more serious note, presidents can address the issues that would interfere with the Constitution yet still sign the law that would give the benefits to where it is needed. Signing statements are an efficient way to provide for the country yet still
Open Document