Froomkin Watch

One of the largest concerns I have about a new president is just how much he or she is prepared to roll back the expansion of executive power, mostly at the expense of Congress. We certainly should go back to following the Constitution, but I'm afraid the question won't be as black and white as that. Whether we get a Democrat or Republican in the White House, I have a hard time imagining the new president suggesting, "You know, I'm too powerful. Maybe I should hand some of these powers back to Congress." Once you've got something, it's hard to let it go.

Unfortunately, this has so far seemed like a pretty dead issue in the campaign. That's not really a surprise, of course. To explore how the candidates would address the Bush administration power grab, the press would first have to acknowledge that there's been a Bush administration power grab. So don't expect that to become a sudden focus. But there may be a way of getting at the issue without explicitly pointing out how the current administration has mugged the Constitution. The Prez himself has somehow remained a nonissue in this campaign, as well. After all, why ask a candidate intending to replace Bush what he or she thinks of Bush? What does that have to do with anything?

Over at Nieman Watchdog, Dan Froomkin has a handful of questions an enterprising reporter could ask of any of the candidates. He's focusing on the Republicans, who are studiously avoiding even mention of the Bush name while they're apparently trying to run on his legacy, but the questions cold work just as well for the Democrats. Whatever the candidates say in response would be quite revealing.

Q. Do you approve of disapprove of the job President Bush is doing?

Q. On a scale of 1 to 10, how would you rate Bush as president?

Q. What would you consider some of Bush’s greatest successes?

Q. What would you consider some of Bush’s greatest failures?

. . .
Q. If you had to give President Bush a grade for how he managed the war in Iraq, would it be an A, B, C, D or F?

Q. What decisions if any would you have made differently if you had been in charge these past seven years?

. . .
Q. Would you continue President Bush's practice of using signing statements to quietly assert his right to ignore legislation passed by Congress?

Q. President Bush's lawyers have asserted that there are few Constitutional checks on a wartime president. Do you agree? And would you consider yourself a wartime president?

While we're on the subject of Froomkin, we should never forget that he has an online column at The Washington Post. Because he often links to the subjects he's writing about, Froomkin almost functions as a blogger. He rarely shies away from controversy, as the titles to his last two columns attest:

Bush Demands Freedom to Torture

Congress Goes Belly Up

If Dan Froomkin in The Washington Post isn't part of your daily routine of what's going on in the world, he should be.