The following letter was submitted to the Congressman via his House website (note: the links didn't go through; it's a text-only message form) -
Note: This letter is from a post in my blog, Random Musings. While I truly don't expect a reply, it's only fair to actually submit the letter to you when I'm posting it on the internet.
Congressman Shadegg -
I know you've been busy with other things, like dealing with criticism for your support of the President's SCHIP veto or fighting off the surging campaign of challenger Bob Lord, but I hope you can take the time to answer a question for me.
You've been getting a lot of love recently in the conservative blogosphere for your bill, HR1359, the Enumerated Powers Act.
As written, it would require that "each Act of Congress shall contain a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion of that Act."
Believe it or not, while I am an active Democrat and certainly more progressive than you, I don't have a major problem with that particular concept.
I do have to wonder, however, where is the same requirement for Presidential acts, such as executive orders and 'signing statements'?
Why don't you believe that the President is as subject to the Constitution and needs to have Constitutionally-granted authority for his or her actions as any member of Congress would?