Tuesday Roundup: Imbalance of Power

Has anyone let George W. Bush know that just because he says in a signing statement that he doesn't like a law, that doesn't mean he can opt not to follow it?

The Government Accountability Office decided to find out — and the answer was apparently "no." They took a sampling of 19 different provisions to which Bush had objected in their bills' signing statements, to see if Bush was complying with the law. Nearly a third of the provisions they examined failed that test. Bush had simply chosen to not bother following the laws he'd signed. Congress, of course, took the opportunity to once again point out the President's disregard for the balance of the three branches of government. Perhaps more significant is the opinion in the article of constitutional lawyer Bruce Fein, who believes that Congress "could use the report to take collective legal action against the White House." I would say I'm all for throwing yet another discrediting scandal on the White House. I'm curious as to how many it will take before the remaining 30% of America realizes exactly what this administration has done to the federal government and the rule of law.

It was a busy day for international news yesterday. The New York Times is covering a sizeable troop offensive of 10,000 American troops in Diyala province. The Times explains that it is part of an agressive coordinated push to curb insurgency over a broad area. Fighting is "expected to be hard," but no American casualties have been reported as of yet.

The Times cites an interesting interaction in this push. They mention that a smaller Iraqi deployment was in Baquba province, where they were joined by some members of the Sunni-affiliated Revolutionary Brigade, and they quote a resident of the area upon seeing the Sunni group working with the majority Shi'a military:

“Why didn’t you do this in the past?” said a man in who gave his name as Abu Muhammad, as he pulled together the hands of a police captain and a brigade commander. He added: “If you work together you can secure Iraq, and the occupation will have no choice but to leave. But if you stay divided Al Qaeda will stay and the occupation will stay.”

If you're wondering — yes, they're putting the problem of the American "occupation" in Iraq on equal conversational footing with Al Qaeda's presence in the country. Small wonder that the Iraqi legislature hasn't put whether they want us there or not up to vote yet. I have a feeling that a vote on that wouldn't go as strongly in our direction as the Bush administration says it would.

A little farther west, it looks like the Palestinian Authority's president, Mahmoud Abbas, is getting some international support in light of Hamas aggression in the Gaza Strip. After Abbas dissolved the coalition Fatah/Hamas government in response to Hamas taking over Fatah outposts in Gaza, the United States decided to free up tens of millions of dollars in aid to the Palestinians that had been frozen when Hamas took over the legislature in 2006. The EU and Israel said they would follow suit. David Makovsky, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, gets the nod for Quote of the Day: "Everyone has looked over into the abyss and seen what happens when moderates don't come together... What we're seeing now is a second chance for everybody." That's about the most optimistic line I've heard come from our foreign policy in a long, long time.

It looks like some folks are still just a smidge upset at Craddick's heavy-handing in the Lege. Representatives Cook and Keffer have asked Attorney General Greg Abbott to review Craddick's decision that he didn't have to recognize someone moving to vacate the chair. I was pretty vocal about my opinions as to whether he could do that, so it's nice to see that there's a chance, however slim, that a ruling that lousy won't actually stand.

Want more good news? It looks like we've taken a first step toward not having some Spanish company build a toll road through the heart of Texas. The Regional Transportation Council voted yesterday to accept the NTTA's bid for the tollway, and turn down Cintra's offer. The complaint on the other side was that it was unfair that the NTTA would get to make a bid so long after Cintra's proposal was made public. Gee, guess it would have been fairer if the NTTA had gotten to bid at the same time as private international contractors, instead of having others try to circumvent (and nearly succeed in doing so) the NTTA's involvement. Others mention that the NTTA hasn't proven itself to be exactly trustworthy; they mention how Fort Worth's Southwest Parkway ended up costing triple what was estimated. That one's harder to argue against. Neither option gets around the fact that we're still paying in tolls for something we already ostensibly pay for in gas taxes, but I guess that's moot for the next two years.

And finally today, a little teaser for you: Charles Kuffner has a piece about a rumor on Right of Texas that has been floating around regarding a fourth (!) Democratic candidate for Cornyn's senate seat. Word on the street is that Congressman Chet Edwards is taking a real serious look at that race. As devoted Texas Blue readers, you get the inside scoop: don't buy the word on the street. Ten gets you twenty that you'll hear something today about how devoted Congressman Edwards is to representing his constituents in Texas' 17th District with zeal and ardor. We'll have more news on that for you as it comes, as well as a couple of other fascinating (and just as improbable) little tidbits running through the rumor mill.