[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 149 (Thursday, October 28, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H11125-H11126]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




CONTROVERSY OVER USE OF PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND PROCLAMATIONS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Metcalf) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. METCALF. Mr. Speaker, a steady increase in controversy over 
executive orders and presidential proclamations has arisen since 
Franklin Roosevelt's administration. Nevertheless, I am truly concerned 
about the comments of the President's Chief of Staff, John Podesta, as 
quoted in the current issue of U.S. News and World Report.
  To quote Podesta: ``Frustrated with the balky Republican Congress, 
President Clinton plans a series of executive orders and changes to the 
Federal Rules that he can sign into law without first getting the okay 
from GOP naysayers. There's a pretty wide sweep of things we're looking 
to do, and we're going to be very aggressive in pursuing it.''
  These statements are deeply disturbing and should be to all 
Americans. An unelected political bureaucrat is boasting to the 
American people about his plan to sidestep the Constitution. Sadly, 
Congress should not be surprised that this President's frustrated staff 
is looking to bypass Congress and implement their agenda. We have seen 
this before.
  When the President issued his Executive Order on striker 
replacements, he attempted to do what had been denied him by the 
regular legislative process. In addition, when the President issued

[[Page H11126]]

his proclamation establishing a national monument in Utah, he again 
tried to do what he had been unable to achieve through Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, the founders expected national policy to be the result 
of open and full debate, hammered out by the legislative and executive 
branches. They believed in careful deliberation conducted in a 
representative assembly, subject to all the checks and balances that 
characterize our constitutional system. Having broken with England in 
1776, they rejected government by monarchy and one-man rule. Nowhere in 
the Constitution is the President specifically given authority to issue 
these directives. The founders specifically placed all legislative 
powers in the Congress.
  In the legislative veto decision in 1983, INS vs. Chadha, the Supreme 
Court insisted that congressional power be exercised ``in accordance 
with a single, finely wrought and exhaustively considered, procedure.'' 
The Court said that the records of the Philadelphia Convention and the 
states ratification debates provide ``unmistakable expression of a 
determination that legislation by the national Congress be a step-by-
step, deliberate and deliberative process.''
  If Congress is required to follow this rigorous process, how absurd 
it is to argue that the President can accomplish the same result by 
unilaterally issuing an Executive Order or presidential proclamation. 
The President's controversial use of presidential directives skirt the 
constitutional process, offend the values announced by the court in the 
legislative veto case, and do serious damage to our commitment to 
representative government and the rule of law.
  It is time to clarify the scope of executive authority vested in the 
presidency by Article II of the Constitution. Through its ability to 
authorize programs and appropriate funds, Congress can define and limit 
presidential powers. As Members, we must participate in our fundamental 
duty of overseeing executive policies, passing judgment on them, and 
behaving as the legislative branch should.
  Mr. Speaker, the road to tyranny does not begin by egregious 
usurpations, but by those which appear logical and meant to gain public 
support. We must not be lulled into complacency by these, because with 
absolute certainty, the ones that come later will be aimed directly at 
our fundamental liberties and representative self-government.
  Remember, eternal vigilance is still the price of liberty.

                          ____________________