Line-item veto may be revived

[NewJerseyDem]

http://www.thehill.com/news/021004/veto.aspx

President Bush is seeking line-item veto power in an effort to curtail congressional spending and reduce the debt, and one senior White House adviser expressed confidence that the president can be given the authority without violating the Constitution.

Bush’s budget proposal would allow the president to “reject new appropriations, new mandatory spending, or limited grants of tax benefits (to 100 or fewer beneficiaries) whenever the president determines the spending or tax benefits are not essential government priorities.”

The line-item veto would be tied to deficit spending, with any savings achieved going toward debt reduction.

President Bush is now seeking line-item veto power to limit the deficit.

Josh Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), told the Senate Budget Committee last week: “Our lawyers are confident that a renewed line-item proposal could be crafted that would withstand” constitutional challenge in the courts.

[RC]

1. I can take a not so wild guess as to what kind of lines will be vetoed

Basically anything that helps the people of this country or "hurts" his friends/contributers.

[La_Serpiente]

2. Weren't line=item vetoes ruled unconstitutional?

[NewJerseyDem]

3. Yeah

They are trying to get around that. Also, Elizabeth Dole is proposing a constitutional amendment to legalize line-item vetoes.

[theorist]

4. Wouldn't this be his first time using the veto? n/t

[NewJerseyDem]

5. That's right

The president supports anything that the republican congress passes because he probably had his political advisors practically write the bill anyway. However, I think some republicans want him to veto something to make it seem like he actually does something involving domestic policy.

[theorist]

6. John Quincy Adams never used his veto.

He also didn't win the popular vote (came in third in the Electoral College), but his buddies in the House *liked* him so much they gave him a job. If I remember correctly, he was a one termer, too.

Wishful thinking?

[unblock]

7. line-item VETO -- another republican lie/misnomer

the line-item veto is actually all about PASSING the line items you DO want, rather than vetoing the line-items you don't.

with 535 members of congress and a president, all legislation is a complex balancing act of careful deals and compromises.

if it passes in its entirety, most congresscritters are happy; they either got the bill itself they wanted, or they got their little rider or pork tossed in to appease them. if it is vetoed in its entirety, they're content in that no one gets screwed and at least they can try again to get a new deal done.

with the line-item "veto", a president can step in a completely screw congresscritters. after a careful deal is made, the president can swoop down and pass all the stuff he/his party wanted and screw the opposition. or he can just screw one or two congresscritters for all sorts of reason, from petty and vindictive to deep strategy.

in any event, it puts an ENORMOUS amount of political power in the hands of the president, as now he would need to sign on to EVERY ASPECT OF EVERY DEAL in congress. a congressman negotiating with congressional "leaders" becomes like trying to negotiate a car deal with a so-called salesman -- the salesman himself can talk all day, but he doesn't have the authority to actually cut a deal; everything has to be run past the sales manager, so talking to the saleman is almost completely a waste of time at best and counterproductive at worst.

anyway, my point is that the power lies in the ability to PASS the line-items you DO want, not in vetoing the line-items you don't. because once the rest of the bill becomes law, whoever wanted the line-items that were left out is himself left out in the cold with no place left to negotiate.

[NewJerseyDem]

8. It is a stupid idea

It is completely inappropriate to give such power to the president when clearly the constitution gives the president the ability to veto an entire bill, not just a line-item. What is really sad is that the Congress is willing to give its consitutional power to the president. Also, the line-item veto wouldn't do anything to curb wasteful spending. Congress would just spend more and the President would only stop the same amount so in the end the veto will be built into the spending.

[RC]

9. President Clinton had the line item veto for a while

and he used it sparingly. It is very handy to get rid of the worst of the pork. With a reasonably honest president, the line item veto is a good thing. Most state governors utilize the line item veto.