Bush pushes Congress on line-item veto (1 Viewer)

[bigjeff]

WASHINGTON - President Bush is pushing Congress to give him more authority to slice and dice the budget, an idea that's popular with conservatives who think the White House needs more muscle to restrict federal spending.


"Under the current system, many lawmakers are able to insert funding for pet projects into large spending bills," Bush said in his Saturday radio address.

Click here for what Bush says "The president is left with the same dilemma"

 

[GPS_Flex]

Åwªï±z¥úÁ{§Ú*̪ººô¯¸

 

[Diogenes]

WASHINGTON - President Bush is pushing Congress to give him more authority to slice and dice the budget, an idea that's popular with conservatives who think the White House needs more muscle to restrict federal spending.

This is long overdue. It's not really a line item veto, more of an enhanced rescission authority: right now if Bush draws a line through an item and sends it back, Congress has to vote to agree with him (and they never do that); under this bill, if Bush sends it back then Congress has to vote affirmatively to spend the money or else the item dies.

We got along just fine for 200 years with presidential impoundment authority - Congress authorizes the money, but the President just doesn't spend it - but Congress took that authority away during the Nixon administration, and has since required the administration to spend all the money they authorize. The results have not been good.

 

[TheNextEra]

This wouldn't be needed if we had a president that knew what the word VETO meant.

I mean seriously, if a president would VETO ANY pork, it would send a message to congress not to put BS pork projects on a bill. Alas this hasn't been the case for quite a while (even with a Dem president).

It seems the answer to the GOP is to make new laws, when in fact, what is needed is a president to use the powers he already has. Same for immigration. However, I guess since it is an election year, it is best to distract instead of using common sense.

 

[Diogenes]

The problem is that he has to veto the whole bill in order to throw out the pork that was attached as riders to it. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

The enhanced recission authority that is under discussion now would be a big and positive step in undoing the harmful "reforms" of the seventies, since it allows him to identify the pork items and bring them up for public discussion.

 

[Pen]

Isn't it true that Clinton briefly held the right of line item veto, but SCOTUS struck the law down as unconstitutional? How would this new law rise above the previous one in acceptability?

 

[jamesrage]

WASHINGTON - President Bush is pushing Congress to give him more authority to slice and dice the budget, an idea that's popular with conservatives who think the White House needs more muscle to restrict federal spending.


"Under the current system, many lawmakers are able to insert funding for pet projects into large spending bills," Bush said in his Saturday radio address.

Click here for what Bush says "The president is left with the same dilemma"

The line-item veto sounds like a double edge sword.The good thing is that it could eliminate alot of pork,the bad thing is that congress and senate could come up with some comprimise and then that comprimise overturned.


For example they could come up with a comprimise that sent employers who hired illegals to prison and permanately took away their ability to own or operate a business and made felons,granted illegals amnesty,put a actual walls on the border,Guest worker programs.A president like Bush who is very proillegal would cut out the stiff punishments for emplyers who hire illegals and the wall on the border and keep everything else which is guest worker programs and amnesty for illegals.

 

[Stinger]

I mean seriously, if a president would VETO ANY pork, it would send a message to congress not to put BS pork projects on a bill. Alas this hasn't been the case for quite a while (even with a Dem president).

That's the problem, he can't just veto the pork since it is tied into the budget authorization bills. It's veto all or none and when Bush 1 tried to threaten that the Dems did the government shutdown thing blaming him for it same with Reagan. The Republicans did pass a line-item veto but the courts said it was unconstitutional, the President doesn't have the authority nor can congress give it to him, the constitution doesn't allow it. So it will take a constitutional amendment to get a real line item veto.

 

[Stinger]

The line-item veto sounds like a double edge sword.The good thing is that it could eliminate alot of pork,the bad thing is that congress and senate could come up with some comprimise and then that comprimise overturned.


For example they could come up with a comprimise that sent employers who hired illegals to prison and permanately took away their ability to own or operate a business and made felons,granted illegals amnesty,put a actual walls on the border,Guest worker programs.A president like Bush who is very proillegal would cut out the stiff punishments for emplyers who hire illegals and the wall on the border and keep everything else which is guest worker programs and amnesty for illegals.

And the Senate and House would have to vote to over-ride it or come up with a new plan. It's called the check and balance.