The White House reacted to charges that the president's signing statement on Friday was a campaign contradiction, saying that the president wasn't against all signing statements, but just felt President George W. Bush over-used them.
"His concern was with what he saw as an abuse of the signing statement by the previous administration. So that the positions he took in the signing statements on the budget bill are entirely consistent with that position," Carney said at Monday's White House briefing.
The statement noted that President Obama had signed the 2011 budget, but took issue with Congress de-funding so-called "czars," who are the name given to some administration officials who head -up area-specific agendas like energy or cars.
This was the 18th signing statement that the president has issued.
The White House defended the move in the original statement:
"Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President's ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President's ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Therefore, the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives."
Republicans immediately blasted the statement. "It's not surprising that the White House, having bypassed Congress to empower these 'Czars' is objecting to eliminating them." House Speaker John Boehner's spokesman Mike Steel said Friday.
The White House also did not agree with a provision about Gitmo detainees.
President Obama signed the budget Friday after months of wrangling with members of Congress. Lawmakers and the president finally reached a deal at the 11th hour and avoided a government shutdown.