Executive versus Legislative, round a million

Congress wants to talk to top White House aides.  Bush tells Congress to go screw, the big kahuna gets to keep his advisers and their advice a secret.  Congress says “Hey, we’re one of the three branches and you aren’t a king.

Is it so bad that I see both sides here? Here’s my big problem right now; Bush won’t even explain how or why the concept of executive privilege applies.  He, or rather the entire White House, have grown so arrogant in their application of power that the refuse to explain where they get the right.  Could that be because it won’t withstand a challenge?  I don’t know.  I do know that Bush should have to explain his position to someone. even if it’s behind closed doors.

I understand that he wants to keep conversations between himself and advisers private.  I get that...and I support it.  However, Congress should (and I believe does) have the right to ask questions.  Once asked, those questions should either be answered, or a good (read: legal) reason should be given as to why they will not be answered.  No, it doesn’t matter that the whole thing is over a witch hunt (the AG firings issue) to begin with.  Congress has legally requested to speak with certain White House staff members.  The White House has returned a response that boils down to “We don’t have to listen to you and we don’t even have to tell you why.”

This is not a kingdom.  Bush doesn’t get to be the decider on everything.

Posted by JimK at 03:52 PM on July 10, 2007
Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email to a friend

Categories: News,  Politics,  The Federal Government
Tags: politics Congress Bush government