Bush Signs Foreign Policy Funding Law, Insists He Is Not Bound by Portions of It
WASHINGTON — President Bush, continuing his struggle with Congress over the conduct of foreign policy, on Friday signed legislation authorizing funding for the State Department, but said he was not bound by several provisions of the law.
“Many provisions of this act could be read to violate fundamental constitutional principles by using legislation to direct . . . the conduct of negotiations with foreign nations,†Bush said in a three-page statement.
A senior official said the Administration is considering filing suit against Congress to test the constitutionality of some provisions and also anticipates that the President might be sued over the issue. The language in the Bush statement amounts to a line-item veto--a refusal to abide by all of the provisions of the law.
White House officials said last year that the Administration was looking for a good case to test the thesis that the President has, in fact if not in law, line-item veto authority. Officials, pointing out that Bush has frequently objected to individual items in laws he signed, said no decision on a test case has been made.
Among the provisions Bush attacked were:
--A section that denies funding for the U.S. delegation to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe unless a congressional representative is included in the delegation.
A senior Administration official interpreted that as a requirement that a congressional representative be included in arms control talks and said: “No way.â€
--A provision that would deny funds to carry on current “dialogue†in the Middle East peace process with any representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization if the President “knows and advises the Congress that that representative directly participated in the planning or execution of a particular terrorist activity that resulted in the death or kidnaping†of a U.S. citizen.
Bush said while “I have no intention of negotiating with terrorists,†the Congress has no right to tell a President who he can or cannot negotiate with. “If this section were interpreted to prohibit negotiations with particular individuals under certain circumstances, it would impermissibly limit my constitutional authority.â€
In addition, Bush objected to provisions requiring the secretary of state to inform Congress of certain diplomatic contacts. Such requirements might force “disclosure of . . . sensitive ongoing negotiations,†Bush said, an unconstitutional hinderance on his ability to negotiate foreign policy.
Bush also lists other provisions he objected to and noted in all cases that he will treat the sections he rejected “as advisory†or he will interpret them “to preserve my constitutional discretion for the conduct of foreign negotiations.â€
The legislation also reflects Congress’ broadest reaction to the Chinese government’s crackdown in Tian An Men Square, denouncing the action and putting into law a number of sanctions that Bush had imposed last summer under executive authority. But in a compromise with the White House, the legislation includes language that allows Bush to lift sanctions if he determines it is in the national interest.
In his statement, Bush repeated his objection to putting restrictions on China into law. “Legislatively mandated sanctions represent an unwise constraint upon the President’s ability to conduct foreign policy,†he said, while acknowledging the waiver.
The legislation authorizes $4.7 billion for fiscal year 1990 and $5 billion for fiscal 1991 to the State Department and other agencies.
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
