The Blog @ Spolitics

Congress’s New Appreciation for the Separation of Powers

by Heywood U. Reedmore -- May 23, 2006 at 2:12 am | In No, Seriously | No Comments

Remember the outrage directed at the White House over the Bush Administration’s stance that Condi Rice should not testify in public in front of the 9/11 Commission because it violated the separation of powers?

Rice told Ed Bradley of CBS’s “60 Minutes”:

“Nothing would be better, from my point of view, than to be able to testify. I would really like to do that. But there is an important principle involved here: It is a long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress.”

Bush himself had this to say on the matter:

“A president and his advisers, including his adviser for national security affairs, must be able to communicate freely and privately without being compelled to reveal those communications to the legislative branch,” Bush said. “This principle of the separation of powers is protected by the Constitution, is recognized by the courts, and has been defended by presidents of both political parties.”

However, Senator’s Kennedy and Schumer didn’t seem to think the separation of powers was all that important. They put forth a resolution that would have forced her testify. After the Bush Administration reversed its position, Schumer said:

“I would remind the president what all Americans know: The truth will set you free! The administration’s reversal shows that it was using executive privilege as an excuse to keep Dr. Rice from testifying.”

Now that the FBI has reportedly caught one of their own, Louisiana Democrat William J. Jefferson, dead to rights Congress has found new appreciation for the separation of powers [WaPo, AP].  So far, it’s mostly Republicans who are weighing in on the issue while the Dems are leaving Jefferson to dangle.  

The irony abounds on this one. Then-White-House counsel, Alberto Gonzales wrote this letter to the 9/11 commission detailing the President’s unprecedented cooperation and reiterating the importance of the separation of powers. And of course, it’s Gonzales’s Justice Department that crossed the line this time. He argued in his letter, such boundaries should only be crossed in “the most extraordinary and unique circumstances.” At least on this talking point, Gonzales is consistent.

Imagine Congress trying to wiggle out of this one by arguing that congressional corruption isn’t a unique circumstance.

Congress is right to be concerned and seek to defend the separation of powers that is crucial to our government. It’s just sad that the rallying cry is centered around concealing their own corruption.

Update: Here’s how Jefferson reportedly stored his booty.

Update: You had to know this was coming.  A Democrat congressman gets caught with a bribe stashed in his freezer and Bush still ends up the bad guy.  And, of course, the New York Times had to work in a reference to the boogeyman:

Pursuing a course advocated by Vice President Dick Cheney, the administration has sought to establish primacy on domestic and foreign policy, not infrequently keeping much of Congress out of the loop unless forced to consult.

The stage is set for The Abuse of Powers Battle.  Let the fingerpointing begin.