|
Both to a degree.
I don't generally have any problem with secrecy of meetings or who the president consults for advice.
On signing statements I'm somewhat indifferent as they're probably legally meaningless. My preference would be that when presented with a bill that the president feels contains unconstitutional provisions that they just veto it. But lacking that I have no problem with them saying "I think this part is unconstitutional so see you in court if you want it enforced." Then the courts decide and if the president doesn't act (assuming the court finds with Congress) then I would have huge problems.
To the extent that Bush and Obama (and all the presidents before them) limit their signing statements to general discussion or highlighting elements they feel create a constitutional conflict I don't have a problem. I feel that Bush regularly crossed that line from issues of constitutional conflict to issues of policy conflict. So far, to the extent that I've looked closely at them Obama's have remained squarely on issues constitutional powers and conflicts.
|