Dick Cheney Editorial Roundup: Cheney Needs a Civics Lesson

June 26, 2007 -- WASHINGTON, DC - Editorial boards around the country are echoing the sentiments of the American people—they've had enough of the culture of corruption and lawlessness promoted by the Bush-Cheney White House. Vice President Cheney's most recent assertion that his office is not a part of the executive branch in order to skirt archiving regulations is only the latest example of the Republican Administration manipulating the law and our government to put partisan and ideological goals above the best interests of the American people.

The following are excerpts from recent editorials from across the country in response to Cheney's assertions:

Herald-Tribune (Sarasota): Cheney's identity crisis. “Bush, it appears, has no inclination to stop his vice president from toying with an executive order or with other measures designed to increase government accountability. But no matter how many games Cheney plays with the question of where he works, there is one unquestionable fact: He works for the American people. As hopeless as the cause may be, Waxman and others need to continue reminding him.” [Sarasota Herald-Tribune, http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20070626/OPINION/706260602/-1/xml, 6/26/07]

San Antonio Express-News: Cheney, sunshine don't mix. “Cheney's efforts to avoid any scrutiny are extreme and disturbing.” [San Antonio Express-News, http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/editorials/stories/MYSA062607.01O.ch..., 6/25/07]

Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune: Cheney's secrecy fits long pattern. “As he has so many times before, Vice President Dick Cheney may well win his current power struggle -- this one with the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) -- at least for a while. But the courts and Congress have a way of catching up to him, and it certainly would be in the public interest if Cheney were to be backed down this time.” [Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune, http://www.startribune.com/561/story/1267831.html, 6/26/07]

The Capital Times: Calling Dick Cheney’s bluff. “Come to think of it, no matter what branch of the government he happens to occupy, doesn't it make sense to defund Cheney? Seriously, any move that disempowers Cheney can only benefit the republic.” [The Capital Times, http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/editorial/198780, 6/25/07]

The Beaumont Enterprise: Cheney’s claim offends Constitution, voters. “The bigger issue for voters is an important one: accountability. Elected officials should not play bureaucratic games like this to avoid fulfilling their duties. It doesn't promote respect for the rule of law. It doesn't meet the high ethical standards that public servants should strive for.” [The Beaumont Enterprise, http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=18509327&BRD=2287&PAG=461&dep..., 6/25/07]

San Francisco Chronicle: Out of control. “Even more bizarre is his rationale for why his office should be exempt. Cheney essentially invokes a separation of powers argument because of his legislative branch duties. Under the U.S. Constitution, Cheney does serve as president of the Senate, and can be called upon to break tie votes. But the idea that he is 'not an entity within the executive branch,' and thus exempt from a presidential order, is both ludicrous and chilling. So much for Dick Cheney's talk about the principle of restoring the powers of the presidency. This latest flap is about the arrogance and contempt for accountability of one vice president: him.” [San Francisco Chronicle, www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/06/26/ED..., 6/26/07]

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Vice Presidency: Having it both ways. “Dick Cheney is usually the first to claim that the Bush administration should get away with something or other under the guise of 'executive privilege' (illegal wiretapping, authorizing illegal torture, trying to circumvent the Presidential Records Act, etc.)

But Cheney, who has never been particularly secretive about his disdain for notions of accountability and such, claimed last week that he does not have to comply with an executive order dealing with oversight of classified information because, he says, his office is not part of the executive branch.” [Seattle Post-Intelligencer, seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/320939_cheneyed.html, 6/24/07]

Albany Times Union: Mr. Cheney's semantics. “Mr. Cheney is splitting hairs and he knows it. The executive order pertains to his executive duties, not his Senate obligations. Yet his narrow reading of the order is another example of his known contempt for accountability, as well as his obsession for secrecy. From the earliest days in office, when he refused to release the names of industry executives who attended his energy task force meeting, Mr. Cheney has been an enemy of the public's right to know.” [Albany Times Union, http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=601107&category=O..., 6/26/07]

Philadelphia Inquirer: Cheney: The imperial veep. “It’s all of a piece with a troubling view of the presidency that affords it expansive powers with few checks. The focus here is on Cheney. But while the vice president may look like a loose cannon, he could not operate as he does - certainly, not ignoring an executive order - without his boss' implicit approval.” [Philadelphia Inquirer, http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20070623_Editorial___Cheney.html, 6/23/07]

Honolulu Star-Bulletin: Cheney’s refusal to comply with oversight order is out of line. “The issue is but one in which Cheney has pulled a cloak of secrecy over his office. He has blocked information about who visits his home and office, his political appointees, where he travels and how much his travel costs, among other matters. While some of these may be rightly kept secret, the vice president has come to believe he is free from checks or scrutiny. He needs to be dissuaded.” [Honolulu Star-Bulletin, http://starbulletin.com/2007/06/25/editorial/editorial01.html, 6/25/07]

Nashua Telegraph: Another daffy move. “If nothing else, the Bush-Cheney administration extols the virtues of democracy, the Constitution and patriotism. Yet, in practice, the president and vice president too often ignore the rules or make new ones to suit themselves, even if it means thumbing their nose at the Constitution and other laws of the land.” [Nashua Telegraph,
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070625/OPINI..., 6/25/07]

Rochester Democrat and Chronicle: Vice president keeps thumbing his nose at rules and regulations. “Cheney's chief of staff, David Addington, insisted that Cheney's office did not meet the definition of an executive branch agency. How ludicrous. That's even more so when it's considered that there are ample reasons to believe suspicions that it's Cheney who is setting White House policy in the first place. Recourse? An appeal has been made by ISOO for intervention by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to resolve the legal dispute. Right. A better bet is the next president.” [Rochester Democrat and Chronicle,
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070624/..., 6/24/07]

Brattleboro Reformer: Too good for the law. “Bush and Cheney are dead wrong in their interpretation of the law. They are subject to the same laws as any other member of the executive branch. And we would suggest that Cheney re-read the Constitution, particularly Articles I and II, before he tries to pretend that he is not part of the executive branch.” [Brattleboro Reformer,
http://www.reformer.com/editorials/ci_6229707, 6/26/07]

The Press Enterprise (Riverside): Cheney’s Chutzpah. “Regardless of where the vice president falls on the organizational chart, he has the same duty to follow good government practice as every other federal official. Considered in that light, Cheney's claims about his office aren't so funny after all.” [Press Enterprise,
http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/editorials/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinion_D..., 6/25/07]

Source: DNC