Just FYI, here is Bush's request to congress, from March 6, 2006 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/pubpress/2006/line_item_veto.pdf
and I agree that a line item veto is necessary, or at bare minimum something that will limit the contents of a bill to items specifically related to the bill, and not allow a lot of port riders. As for why such riders are allowed, I would say it has more to do with lining pockets than with passing good laws. On 4/30/06, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why would it be ruled unconstitutional? Because it allowed the president to > override items in a budget that was submitted by another branch of > government? I guess I answered my own question, but on the whole something > like that really is needed. An average budget/bill has literally hundreds of > riders attached to it that usually have nothing to do with the base bill. > Why was the system every set up to allow such riders? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:205903 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
