Time to push for the line item veto again.

[CSM]

Bad idea.

What WOULD be a good idea is to craft a law that makes each spending policy, every earmark and so forth be its OWN LAW, and not allow Congress to insinuate these pork chops into bills that are really entirely about something else.

Putting earmarks in bills that people really must vote for is corrupt.

BOTH parties do this, BTW.

That I could indeed support.

 

[glockmail]

It'll never happen.

 

[editec]

It'll never happen.

I agree.

It probably won't happen.

Because if it did happen neither the Republican NOR the Democrats could bring home the bacon.

Neither could they hide the bacon from public scrutiny like is so often done now.

But won't ALSO happen is line-item veto.

That gives the POTUS too much control over the legislative process...in fact it neuters Congress's most important power...the power to advance spending legislation.

In fact that proposla is, I think a violation of the constitution since it gives the POTUS completely control over the legislation put before him for consideration.

Whereas as my proposal doesn't violate the constitution at all, (it could easily be a procedural thing done by Congress) and still gives the legislature complete control over what bills get to the POTUS.

 

[glockmail]

But mine is very likely to happen, since McCain has promised just that.

 

[jillian]

But mine is very likely to happen, since McCain has promised just that.

Because McCain has been so "honest" about everything, eh?

Again, unless he can amend the constitution himself, it's not happening.

 

[glockmail]

Because McCain has been so "honest" about everything, eh?

Again, unless he can amend the constitution himself, it's not happening.

Even your #2 man said he would vouch for Mickey's integrity.

Since when is using the Veto against any legislation that contains pork unconstitutional?

By the way would this make McCain the first Muslim president?

 

[editec]

But mine is very likely to happen, since McCain has promised just that.

he did?

Somebody better remind him that the SCOTUS, assuming they'll still understand the point of the balance of power between the branches of Federal government, is going to rule it unconsitutional.

 

[editec]

Even your #2 man said he would vouch for Mickey's integrity.

Since when is using the Veto against any legislation that contains pork unconstitutional?

By the way would this make McCain the first Muslim president?

Your confused about what line item veto means, then

A line item veto is not the same thing as a Presidential veto.

A POTUS can veto the entire bill.

He cannot rewrite the bill which is exactly what a line item veto would amount to.

Significant difference that.

 

[ignatov]

It is time to reign in congress...

...and consolidate power in the hands of an individual. Let's hear it for monarchy!

 

[Article 15]

I do not agree that such an amendment would be good for the Country. A president with that power could totally change the meaning and intent of any and all bills sent to him for signature.

I'm with RSG on this one ...

It may sound like a good idea at first until you realize how much power this grants the already too powerful executive.

 

[Article 15]

Bad idea.

What WOULD be a good idea is to craft a law that makes each spending policy, every earmark and so forth be its OWN LAW, and not allow Congress to insinuate these pork chops into bills that are really entirely about something else.

Putting earmarks in bills that people really must vote for is corrupt.

BOTH parties do this, BTW.

I like it.

Congress wouldn't go for it.

 

[strollingbones]

line item veto....campaign spending reform, abortion, border controls....

all good subjects....but note once again...they are like reform of the electoral coll. lots of talk about it pior to elections..that just dies once the votes are cast.

 

[Paulie]

With all the talk and rhetoric of the campaign being the same old crap, it's time for us as citizens to push for a Constitutional amendment for the line item veto.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Line-Item Veto - June 25, 1998

As it stands a president can only sign or veto an entire bill and pork barrel spending is out of control. It is time to reign in congress.

Armed with a tool such as the line item veto we may see a president who can truly achieve change.

I agree. I don't see how McCain can possibly make good on his promise to veto pork without the line item.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bad idea.

What WOULD be a good idea is to craft a law that makes each spending policy, every earmark and so forth be its OWN LAW, and not allow Congress to insinuate these pork chops into bills that are really entirely about something else.

Putting earmarks in bills that people really must vote for is corrupt.

BOTH parties do this, BTW.

then the pampered pols would be whining that they have too much work to do and would want bigger staffs and then bigger offices etc etc etc

 

[Skull Pilot]

...and consolidate power in the hands of an individual. Let's hear it for monarchy!

yes you know that crossing out a few lines on a bill is the same as being a dictator

 

[Paulie]

If the pres got too out of hand with his line items, there's still always the override in congress. Checks and balances would not be impeded.

I'm for it. But maybe it should be stipulated that the line item can only cancel out spending, and nothing else. Think the liberals would go for it?

 

[ignatov]

yes you know that crossing out a few lines on a bill is the same as being a dictator

No need for sarcasm. The founding fathers gave Congress law-making powers to avoid tyranny, and gave the President a check on that power via the veto. A line item veto would essentially grant the President himself that law-making ability.

So, yes, crossing out a few lines on a bill is the same as being a dictator, at least according to the Constitution. But thanks for playing, and you're not going away empty handed! What do we have for him, Johnny?

Johnny: "Watchbands from Speidel!"

 

[Gunny]

This Average Joe thinks it is a good idea...

-Joe

I think it's a bad idea. How about just forcing Congress to pass legislation as one for one items, no riders?

At the same time, it would completely destroy whatever is left of the art of compromise in Congress.

 

[glockmail]

he did?

Somebody better remind him that the SCOTUS, assuming they'll still understand the point of the balance of power between the branches of Federal government, is going to rule it unconsitutional.

The blanket Veto that is written into the Constitution is unconstitutional?

 

[glockmail]

Your confused about what line item veto means, then

A line item veto is not the same thing as a Presidential veto.

A POTUS can veto the entire bill.

He cannot rewrite the bill which is exactly what a line item veto would amount to.

Significant difference that.

I think that you're the one who's confused. I don't support the line item veto. What I support is the Prez telling Congress that he will veto any bill that contains pork, then doing just that.

This is, like, my third try trying to explain this simple concept to you.