Campaign promises are as old as our democracy — as too is deep skepticism that they’ll be kept. Americans are generally an optimistic people but when it comes to our politics we have developed a wary eye. And sometimes the differences between promises kept and promises broken is a very thin line.

During his 2008 campaign for president, Barack Obama was highly critical of his predecessors’ use of “signing statements,” an obscure Executive Branch tool to get things done via back channel. Candidate Obama promised “restraint” in their use. By restraint, he meant not issuing signing statements that “undermine the legislative intent or nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law.” But Obama also thinks the signing statement is a tool “to protect a president’s constitutional prerogatives.”

Clearly President Obama feels his prerogatives have been threatened by Congress, because he has signed five statements as of July 26, 2009. That pace puts him slightly ahead of President George W. Bush, who didn’t sign his fifth until August of his first year in office. Tell that to your average Obama supporter and they will likely raise their eyebrows in surprise.

Signing statements became highly unpopular in many circles during President Bush’s administration, as he issued nearly 1200 of the squirrelly little buggers —double that of all previous presidents combined. If you’re not a big fan of signing statements, then Obama’s early pace does not bode well for you.

But is he really breaking his promises, or is he doing exactly what he said he would do? His signing statements to date have not exactly been earth-shattering. One example is a signing statement on the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission, where Obama clarified that although Congressional participation is appropriate and welcomed, it is not administrative.

That kind of signing statement isn’t likely to keep anybody up at night, but Congress is already on the alert.  Last month, several Democratic representatives sent President Obama a letter registering their unhappiness with his signing statement asserting his constitutional right as president to negotiate with international organizations. But is this genuine concern over Obama’s ability to negotiate good policy or just the typical wrangling that goes on between two branches of government asserting their own powers?

An examination of President Obama’s signing statements indicates that he has generally shown restraint at least in their content, if not their number. But if he seeks to keep the trust of the American people, he needs to make the statements public by posting them on the website www.whitehouse.gov. That way we can ponder their virtues ourselves while he tries to keep two campaign promises.