[dschapin]

Interesting back and forth between Gov. Romney and Giuliani on their respective spending and tax records. Also, Gov. Romney criticising Mayor Giuliani for his taking the line item veto to court. Giuliani responds that it is unconstitutional and he is a strict constructionist.

[jonathanmo]

Line-item veto IS unconstitutional...one for Giuliani...minus one for Mitt

[The Pack Knight]

Giuliani's right there. As much as a line-item veto might be good policy, it's unconstitutional and that case was rightly decided.

Personally, I think the issue is worthy of an Amendment.

[redgirlinabluestate]

Strict constructionist Justice Scalia disagrees with Rudy and dissented on that case:

Had the Line Item Veto Act authorized the President to "decline to spend" any item of spending contained in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, there is not the slightest doubt that authorization would have been constitutional. What the Line Item Veto Act does instead -- authorizing the President to "cancel" an item of spending -- is technically different. But the technical difference does not relate to the technicalities of the Presentment Clause, which have been fully complied with[.] Clinton, 524 U.S. 417, 469 (1998)

Mitt is right. There is a way to have a line item veto that will pass constitutional muster.