Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WSJ: Cuts for Katrina - Time to admit the wastefulness of bridges to nowhere
Wall Street Journal ^ | September 21, 2005 | Editorial

Posted on 09/21/2005 5:18:08 AM PDT by OESY

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last
To: SIRTRIS

All the so-called "pork" is just a symptom of a far larger problem (but should be cut out just the same). The larger problem is a Federal Government that has grown so far out of it's legal and constitutional boundaries. How many entitlement programs are found in the Constitution?

Then again - what part of the Constitution authorizes a payroll tax of it's citizens (without having to manufacture an additional amendment)? The founding father's found a way to fund the constitutional costs of the Federal Government without such a direct tax. They did not envision the nanny-state that we have now.


21 posted on 09/21/2005 7:32:47 AM PDT by TheBattman (Islam (and liberalism)- the cult of Satan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman

You are right. The line item veto was ruled unconstitutional. I was corrected in an earlier thread.


22 posted on 09/21/2005 7:35:08 AM PDT by manwiththehands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman

Well, we are just demanding way too much of government. You can forever whine about tax-dollar value but its still a great country to live in versus ALL the other social experiments tried (ie communism). I shutter to think what Kerry would of done if he were elected president. Looks like Clinton had it pretty easy with his basket of fate!


23 posted on 09/21/2005 7:52:55 AM PDT by SIRTRIS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: blaquebyrd

No, they wouldn't.

The Country is too politicized. It's doubtful he'll ever hit higher than a 57% again. That would be the high, imo, even if he caught Osama bare handed.

The President could do as you suggest. VETO a bill. But I challenge everyone look at the arrogance of the House and the Senate. Especially the Senate. They'll retalliate in some measure. Very likely it will be on a conservative policy.

The President trades pork for passage of other items on his agenda. The risk in stopping that flow of pork, or at least making it harder to come by, is that, for example, they could cease funding of the WOT-specifically Iraq. Think they wouldn't do it? I believe they would. To lesser extent maybe they'll endorse tax hikes.

This isn't to say I'm advocating against a VETO. I'm not. I'm just stating everyone needs to go into this with eyes wide open. There are consequences to every action. Expect retaliation for a VETO.


24 posted on 09/21/2005 8:41:14 PM PDT by Soul Seeker (Barbour/Honore in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson