Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power: on Government Reform

Barack Obama: Bad idea to over-classify information

A: I believe the Administration’s use of executive authority to over-classify information is a bad idea. We need to restore the balance between the necessarily secret and the necessity of openness in our democracy--which is why I have called for a National Declassification Center.

Barack Obama: Bush’s signing statements are a clear abuse of prerogative

A: Signing statements have been used by presidents of both parties, dating back to Andrew Jackson. While it is legitimate for a president to issue a signing statement to clarify his understanding of ambiguous provisions of statutes and to explain his view of how he intends to faithfully execute the law, it is a clear abuse of power to use such statements as a license to evade laws that the president does not like or as an end-run around provisions designed to foster accountability. I will not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law. The fact that President Bush has issued signing statements to challenge over 1100 laws--more than any president in history--is a clear abuse of this prerogative.

John Edwards: No use of signing statements as back-door vetoes

A: I strongly disagree with President Bush’s use of signing statements as back-door vetoes and permission slips to disregard laws he finds inconvenient or objectionable. As president, I will return to the way that signing statements have been used historically. No one, including the president, is above the law.

John Edwards: Bush damages constitution by increasing power of presidency

John McCain: No signing statements: either sign or veto bills

A: As President, I won’t have signing statements. I will either sign or veto any legislation that comes across my desk.

Mitt Romney: Signing statements are an important presidential practice

A: I share the view of many past presidents that signing statements are an important presidential practice.

Rudy Giuliani: President must be free to defend nation with surveillance

A: The President must be free to defend the nation. While the Congress has an essential constitutional role in our national defense, the Supreme Court has also recognized that the president has certain core constitutional responsibilities to ensure that our nation can defend itself and our fundamental liberties in times of emergency. Controversies on this question are as old as our Constitution, and have been faced by many of our most respected presidents, and they will not disappear even after we have succeeded in the war that terrorists have declared on our citizens and homeland. Our aim must be to strike a balance between order and liberty that addresses the challenges we face within the bounds of the Constitution.