Well, that didn’t last long.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/03/27/coronavirus-trump-objects-oversight-provisions-stimulus-law/2931740001/

Trump issues a signing statement saying he will be the oversight for business stimulus, not a Congressionally approved IG, as in the bill he negotiated and agreed to with Congress. So “trust but verify” is now just “trust”.

20 thoughts on “Well, that didn’t last long.

  1. Nice move, Mr. President!

    People forget that the Constitution gives the Treasury — an executive branch agency — authority over monetary policy.

    Like

    1. So lying to Congress about agreeing to oversight is “a nice move”.

      Typical.

      You forget that you may not care where your money goes, but I do care about mine.

      What I don’t understand is why it is so important to keep stimulus money a secret. It is not a matter of state security.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. RE: “What I don’t understand is why it is so important to keep stimulus money a secret.”

        It won’t be a secret. Every transaction has to be recorded and will be auditible.

        Like

        1. When? Originally it was six months down the road.

          People just don’t remember all the flak the 2009-10 money. Republicans were screaming, but now it is “who cares”. Just shut up and move along.

          Liked by 2 people

        2. RE: “but now it is ‘who cares’.”

          For me, for one, it is more like: Don’t be foolish by spreading unnecessary fear and speculation.

          Like

          1. In other words just shut up and move along.

            Fear and speculation have nothing to do with simple accountability. There is no reason to not have that. What is the administration worried about so much that it has to immediately renege on an agreement?

            Liked by 2 people

          2. RE: “What is the administration worried about so much that it has to immediately renege on an agreement?”

            What do you mean by renege, and why are you promoting conspiracy theories?

            Maybe you should look into the crematories FEMA is building in Walmart parking lots.

            Like

          3. Don’t be obtuse. Trump agreed to the stimulus plan and signed it into law.

            Then he issued the signing statement about not using an appointed IG. That he would be the oversight. That issue was specifically negotiated and was a sticking point.

            So he agreed, then reneged. Within a few days. So he never planned to to stand by his agreement.

            Go stuff your parking lots and pay attention for a change.

            With all due respect, of course.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. RE: “Don’t be obtuse. Trump agreed to the stimulus plan and signed it into law.aaaaaaaaaaaaa’

            Perhaps you should read the president’s signing statement. It says, in relevant part:

            “Section 4018 of Division A of the Act establishes a new Special Inspector General for Pandemic Recovery (SIGPR) within the Department of the Treasury to manage audits and investigations of loans and investments made by the Secretary of the Treasury under the Act. Section 4018(e)(4)(B) of the Act authorizes the SIGPR to request information from other government agencies and requires the SIGPR to report to the Congress ‘without delay’ any refusal of such a request that ‘in the judgment of the Special Inspector General’ is unreasonable. I do not understand, and my Administration will not treat, this provision as permitting the SIGPR to issue reports to the Congress without the presidential supervision required by the Take Care Clause, Article II, section 3.”

            The point is that the new IG post will not be ignored or eliminated, but it will not be allowed to interfere with the executive’s constitutionally-granted powers. If that concerns you, your beef is with the constitution, not the president.

            Like

          5. “ The president was given roles in the legislative process – proposing measures and signing or vetoing completed bills – but the Founders included an explicit mandate that the president respect the work of Congress, directing that “he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

            https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/constitution-check-what-does-the-take-care-clause-mean/

            If the law he signed says that the IG shall report to Congress, then Trump saying “only with his approval” is not faithfully executing the law.

            His lawyers’ interpretation of the Constitution is ripe for challenge and he knows that will not be resolved for months or more. Which, of course is the idea.

            So he is effectively using the time element in a national crisis for his own political, or more likely, financial gain…or both.

            The Take Care Clause has been only ruled in a few times in history, but the general consensus is that the clause put the responsibility on the president to adhere to Congressional law, not his own interpretation of it. But they have been narrow rulings.

            In this case he still has the discretionary power awarded his administration to dole out the money, Congress just wants a real time accounting of how the people’s treasure is being expended.

            It is the same move as his interminable lawsuits against vendors he actually owed in order to force them in bankruptcy from legal fees. A political tactic still worthy of being accurately labeled a renege by a scoundrel.

            IMHO

            Liked by 1 person

          6. Essentially Trump is saying he will do as he pleases despite signing into a law that requires oversight by a special IG approved by Congress.

            He is not following the Constitution that he swore an oath to uphold. He also knows we cannot go to court on this due to time constraints. So he is effectively using a national crisis for his own personal, political and likely financial gain.

            IMHO

            Liked by 1 person

          7. RE: “Congress just wants a real time accounting of how the people’s treasure is being expended.”

            Congress is not entitled to a real-time accounting, in my view. An accounting yes, in real-time no. The way Congress wrote the provision amounts to overreach, a power grab that is out of line.

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s