Posted on 02/05/2006 7:26:56 AM PST by new yorker 77
It seems like the line-item veto is one of the few issues that is neither liberal or conservative.
There is a way that Congress can make a presidential line item veto work. They can, in the official record, subdivide each line item of an appropriations bill into separate acts - HR06371-1, HR06371-2, etc., etc. and then have one vote on the lot of them.
An interesting solution, and one which might well stand up to the legal challenge. Which is why, of course, it would never see the light of day in Congress.
Or, they could just a pass a constitutional amendment. Imagine that!
Wow! Now that's two 'weird' groupings...
.
I don't want a line item veto. Best case it is in the hands of a good president. Worse case you have given a new tool to the Bill Clinton's of the world. You have to look at unintended consequences.
True, but congress can pass legislation, without getting approval from the states, whereas the state legislatures (2/3) must approve a constitutional amendment.
The proposed solution would only require a simple majority of the House and Senate. A Constitutional Amendment would require 2/3rds of both houses and 3/4ths the state legislatures. If Congress can't muster a majority it won't turn up a super majority.
It is, after all, still a veto. Which can be overridden.
As far as the probability of election of a latter-day Slick is concerned......I guess we'll just have to keep FReeping to watch for those bums. In ANY party.
The line-item veto passed the Senate 69-29 and the House 294-134 - more than enough to pass a constitutional amendment. You wouldn't dare suggest that our honorable Congress critters were merely grandstanding, would you?'
And why on earth would the States block a line-item veto amendment?
The problem I have with a line item veto is that a president can use it to eviscerate the party not his own.
That was the point where I couldn't stomach any more and had to switch to another channel.
Since WHEN has this boob been in favor of a line item veto?
Cripes, he's had a GOP controlled Congress for six years and hasn't bothered to use his veto even once.
What a stinking farce.
Is that a serious question? Who do you think benefits from PORK? State legislators don't care about the national budget or even national defense, but they sure care about building bridges to nowhere in their constituents' districts.
I don't know if they can pass several bills like that without unanimous consent.
Hmm.. Well, I can't say that's not a good point, but I would think that it'd be a difficult thing for legislators to oppose. The Senate and House didn't support them so heavily because they don't like pork, but because it was politically unviable to oppose them (and they expected the Supreme Court to strike it down).
Either way, can you think of anything it would hurt for the House and Senate to pass a line-item veto amendment and then we could see what the states do?
If Pres. Bush is serious about the line-item veto, and it's not just the typical empty SOTU rhetoric, then I expect him to push for an amendment. That's the only way to do it, and we already know he doesn't have any problem with the idea of amending the constitution. After all, he's called for at least two of them..
I knew line-item veto was a total sham when both chambers passed it by amendment level margins, then immediately appealed them to the Supreme Court, and then just shrugged rather than send an amendment to the States once it was struck down.
Yep, very weird grouping. I doubt it has ever existed for another case.
It seems to me that having only one vote in Congress is an indication that the legislation in question constitutes just a single bill.
If a President wishes to line out a single item in a bill, he need only inform both Houses of Congress of that fact, and then each House can pass a bill with the offending line ommitted, then the President can sign the modified bill.
The Constitution already contains the mechanism to accomplish exactly what people claim thay want. The reason that the Constitutional mechanism is not sufficient to them is BECAUSE both Houses of Congress would NOT approve the bill with the desired ommission.
That is why the line-item-veto is unConstitutional.
I would like to see a change to the congressional rules allowing for the President to submit redacted legislation to both houses for a straight up-down vote without it having to go through committees or other such nonsense. Just "Here's the bill--debate it and then either vote 2/3 of both houses to pass the original, 1/2+1 of both houses to pass my changed version, or else forget the whole thing."
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.