[Types_with_Fist]

I hope Bush gets this done. Then he could avoid the veto item by item instead of one whole bill at a time.

[mysterio]

Bush and vetos, that's teh funny of the day.

[Hodar]

No surpise here, the Republicans gave it to Clinton; and the Supreme's ruled it un-consitutional.

Now we have a new mix in the Supremes ... let's try it again.

[munchtipq]

one thing i didn't quite get, maybe someone could answer for me, but when the president marks items for veto and congress then votes on them, do they vote on all line-item vetoes for a bill at once? or do they vote on each line veto individually? it seems like if they have to vote on all of the line-item vetoes at once we'll end up with the same sort of back-scratching we have now.

[mrsmith]

A bona fide "line item veto" is unconstitutional, I wish they'd call this something else. Like "line item review".

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Hell i wish he would VETO anything a democrat puts on paper or opens it's mouth about that would be a start to a good year and weed out the Republicans who want to tax and spend us into Oblivion

[TexasTransplant]

About 6 years too late

TT

[right right]

The Congress can write their way around it and not all Presidents will use it for the good of the country.

[DustyMoment]

Republicans Back Line-Item Veto for President

Personally, I like the line-item veto. However, I don't see the point of this - Bush has yet to demonstrate that he can spell veto, much less actually use it. Since he has never used a veto on any of the dreck legislation and bloated budget bills that have crossed his desk, what does he need it for? Clinton had it and asked that it be repealed - of course, Clinton didn't care if Congress passed a bill or not; if he wanted it, he just issued an executive order.

IMO, this is BS and a waste of taxpayer time and money to pay for this nonsense.

[demkicker]

Voting FOR this is the GOP's ticket to victory in November. All of them need to pay attention. We're watching closely if they want to be re-elected.