Cheney: Monuments May Be Cancelled

nralife

New member
Cheney: Monuments May Be Cancelled

The Associated Press

By JOSEPH B. FRAZIER

CENTRAL POINT, Ore. (AP) - Republican vice presidential hopeful Dick Cheney raised the possibility Thursday that some of the new national monuments created by President Clinton could be reviewed and possibly rescinded if he and George W. Bush are elected in November.

``Of course it's not my decision to make. It's the president-elect who has to make the decision,'' Cheney said, commenting on what is a hot topic in the West. ``But I certainly expect we would review a lot of these decisions to see whether or not any action was appropriate.''

He said Clinton has used his executive authority ``willy-nilly all over the West'' to create national monuments without considering the desires of the people who will be affected.

Many fear that creating monument after monument could harm the Western economy by removing land from commercial uses like grazing, logging and mining.

During his time in office, Clinton has created or added to 10 national monuments covering nearly 4 million Western acres in his effort to carve out an environmental legacy.

Environmentalists have welcomed designations, but critics complain they bypass the normal give-and-take of the political process because congressional approval is not required.

Cheney said that when he was a congressman from Wyoming he helped get 1 million acres designated as wilderness - but only after listening to all sides.

``We need to strike a balance. We need an opportunity for all to be heard,'' he said.

Earlier, Cheney extolled the virtues of the family farm to about 150 people at Crater High School, including members of the school's Future Farmers of America organization. He said one reason a Bush-Cheney administration would abolish the estate tax would be to help farmers ``pass on from one generation to the next their farms and ranches.''

``It's not just the sheer number of people in agriculture. It's the values we want to preserve,'' Cheney said, recalling his childhood in rural Nebraska and relatives who were farmers.

``We don't want a situation where all we have are large corporate farms,'' he said.

In a subsequent discussion with journalists, Cheney said the Clinton administration has not done enough to make American agricultural products attractive to overseas markets.




------------------

NRA Joe's Second Amendment Discussion Forum

http://Second.Amendment.Homepage.com
 
<Rant on>

Reviewing the monuments is a small, small, insignificant start, but a start nonetheless. I hope the same attitude spills over into looking at ALL executive orders. Specifically anything ClintonClintonandGore has signed over the last 7 long, long years has to be reviewed and evaluated for constitutional muster.

Once that is done, then the entire institution of executive orders needs to be reviewed and changed. It is now clear that our freedoms and the protection of the constitution is effective ONLY when the president is law-abiding and beholding to the rule of law under the constitution. Clinton has forever disabused me of the assumption that the president automatically believes in the rule of law. No, from now on we must assume the president is a predator and checks and balances must be emplaced to protect us from his or her behavior.

Oh! Silly me! For a minute there I thought the congress was there to serve as a check or balance to the executive branch. Glad that's over! Maybe we start cleaning the barn by dismissing all incumbent senators.

<Rant off>

------------------
Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Barry Goldwater--1964
 
Waitone; I have to agree. WE have to insist that Congress be the check and balance. Of course it would be nice to think that:

A. It might happen, or
B. It might not be necessary again.


------------------
You have to be there when it's all over. Otherwise you can't say "I told you so."

Better days to be,

Ed
 
Clinton has stated in no uncertain terms that he would just as soon trash one part of the Constitution. Why should we be surprised that he has trashed another part - namely the checks and balances provision. He is the closest to a king this nation has ever seen. And not a good king at that.
 
You're forgetting JFK, Clinton's rolemodel...

Ask not what your country can do for you my ass. We wouldn't have a government if it weren't supposed to serve OUR interests. I'm all for civic pride and participation, but Kenedy laid the foundation for people like Clinton to build their communist agenda and bring it to the White House.

------------------
The Alcove

I twist the facts until they tell the truth. -Some intellectual sadist

The Bill of Rights is a document of brilliance, a document of wisdom, and it is the ultimate law, spoken or not, for the very concept of a society that holds liberty above the desire for ever greater power. -Me
 
Now hang on a minute. Somebody needs to 'splain to me something here.

I was under the impression that the Congress had a certain amount of time - like 30 days - to halt or discuss an Executive Order.

Am I wrong here, or did I wake up in the middle of a monarchy? :confused:
 
And in other news today, a sculpture comissioned for Mt. Rushmore to commemorate the greatest Arkansas President ever, at an expense of 100 bazillion dollars, turned out to be a bust today. The artist, "Mr. Urine" spent months (and bazillions) planning and making multiple casts of the President's body. After months, the breathless crowd awaited the unveiling of the PC/BC monument on Mt. Rushmore. Everyone needed to rent very expensive 1x100,000 power binoculars (provided by the artist) to see the exibit. Yes you guessed it, the artist had perfectly rendered "penis-head" in life sized proportions. When questioned, he stated "Bill wanted a legacy, I chose to give it to him". Most of the thousands of P/C spectators complained they couldn't quite make out what that little thing was sticking out of his ear.........
 
I'm not a Klinton fan but this reminds me of the millions spent on the Lewinsky scandel. Lets face it, the Repubs had more fun trashing Klinton, they could care less about the BJ! I hope when and if Bush/Cheney get to the whitehouse they have other business to attend to than whining about Klinton. This is the very thing that makes me lean towards Liberatarians. I think the two major parties are more interested in power over the other than whats better for the country.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TMoney:
I was under the impression that the Congress had a certain amount of time - like 30 days - to halt or discuss an Executive Order.[/quote]

As a general rule, no. An executive order is an order by the President to members of the executive branch of government. Congress has passed some laws that allow the president to make certain rules that have the effect of law in the nation. Depending on the relevant Congressional law, Congress might have an approval process for executive orders or it might not. There's no set-in-stone rule that says Congress has an automatic right-of-review over executive orders, and in fact some executive orders that explicitly deal with the president instructing his underlings are generally regarded as exempt from Congressional review under the "separation of powers" doctrine (which basically says that the different branches of government won't interfere with each other's internal workings).
 
Back
Top