Republicans, on the other hand, see his veto as a gross misuse of the presidential power. John Boehner has said, "The president has vowed to veto it. Why? Because he wants to stop and spend more money on his domestic agenda".
Obama wants to close Guantanamo because he believes it's the best mechanism for jihadists to recruit and that it's expensive and outdated. The proposed bill severely limited his ability to do this.
Congress has vowed to override Obama's veto an push ahead with the bill. Senator Jack Reed has said that he hopes that a more responsible and reasonable NDAA can be agreed upon to give the troops support and stability that they need.
Was Obama right to veto? Can the federal government reach an agreement?
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/10/22/obama-veto-defense-authorization-bill-spending-fight/74371856/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/22/us-usa-fiscal-defense-idUSKCN0SG2LF20151022
2 comments:
President Obama was right to veto the $612 billion deal proposed by Congress. Not only does it oppose the President's agenda, but it puts a large amount of money at stake. Furthermore the bill would negate military budget cuts that are to come into effect, as well as prohibit the closing of Guantanamo Bay. Additionally, it would add $38 billion to a separate military account without a price ceiling. For the GOP to think the President would ignore the fine print is rather outlandish; thus leading me to believe they fully expected the result. President Obama's decision is not proliferating the prevalence of terrorism against the U.S. in any conceivable way, as his decision was not nefarious. Instead of adding actual substance to the government or effectively rationing the budget, Congress is simply trying to make a political statement against the President. Despite this, the bill has the ability to play into the President's hand, allowing him to use the deal as evidence of lackluster bipartisanship. Nevertheless, in terms of reaching a deal The federal government absolutely has the power to reach an agreement. That of which will most likely be manifested within the coming months; whether the agreement favours conservatives or liberals is entirely unknown however.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-vetoes-defense-bill_5629413de4b0443bb56344d7
http://www.wsj.com/articles/obama-to-veto-612-billion-defense-bill-1445475290
Yes, I think President Obama was right to veto. As the president, the power of veto follows the process of checks and balances, while as commander in chief he must also choose the best defense policies. President Obama did say that the bill would ensure military funding as well as improvements on armed forces retirement and cyber security. However, the $612 billion defense policy bill would have made it harder for him to achieve some of his originals goals. For example, the bill provides for provisions that would make it more difficult for him to transfer suspected terror detainees out of the Guantanamo Bay prison, which he wants to close. Not only did president Obama not like the bill, but he also accused Republicans of using “gimmicks” as well as prohibiting changes that were needed to address modern security threats. I believe this accusation shows just a little of the hostilities between Obama and the Republican party. These hostilities are going to make every compromise difficult; the Republicans have already vowed to veto. Senator John McCain even said that the veto was “misguided, cynical, and downright dangerous”; accusing Obama of putting political drama over the troops. With the House Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisting that they will support Obama I do not see an agreement in the near future.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_DEFENSE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-10-22-16-04-52
Post a Comment