why shouldnt the president be able to red line some items???????

afaik he already has right of veto.

Vic


John Stroebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> Well now, it seems Bush jr wants to grab a little more power. Rove and
> Cheney got him the Supreme Court, a slim majority in both houses (until
> Nov at least), he has his fun with 'signing statements'...now he wants
> authority for line item veto on funding approved by Congress. The reason
> be believes this is a good idea: 'One pinhead is better than all of
> Congress.'
> 
> 'Pappy, I wanna be appointed DICTATOR next!" jr tells Bush sr..."I wanna
> be the BIG Decider!" Well OK georgie honey, time you string all those
> vacations together into one BIG vacation! Hows about you just
> concentrate on clearing shrub, drinking heavily and doing Condi....until
> the Federal Marshals come by to take you on that long Federal
> vacation??? Hmmm???
> 
> Folks, vote in November...and take 10 friends with ya.
> 
> White House steps up effort to gain line-item veto
> House expected to vote on bill today; Dem leaders mostly opposed to plan
> 
> 
> By JULIE MASON
> Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau
> 
> WASHINGTON - The White House on Wednesday intensified a last-minute
> campaign to win line-item veto authority from Congress, but a top
> administration official conceded that the outcome was far from certain.
> 
> The House today is expected to vote on a bill that would allow the
> president to red-line specific expenditures in appropriation bills.
> 
> "It's not going to be easy to get this to the president's desk," said
> Rob Portman, director of the Office of Management and Budget. "This is a
> major change."
> 
> Portman, a former Republican congressman from Ohio, has been pushing the
> issue on Capitol Hill, and on Wednesday met with reporters from 13
> regional newspapers, hoping to drum up more support for the plan.
> 
> "This is not about President Bush, this is something that's for the
> presidency," Portman said. "Forty-three governors have something quite
> similar to this, so it's not untested."
> 
> Congress in 1996 gave President Clinton line-item veto power, but two
> years later the courts struck it down as unconstitutional, in part
> because it gave too much power to the executive branch.
> 
> In its new incarnation, the president's line-item veto could be reversed
> by a simple majority in both House and Senate. The old line-item veto
> required a two-thirds margin of both House and Senate to override the
> president.
> 
> The Democratic leadership in the House is mostly opposed to the plan,
> along with some Republican appropriators.
> 
> Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, said he supported line-item authority in the
> 1990s but worries that Bush already is grabbing too much power from
> Congress.
> 
> "I really don't feel comfortable having a stronger executive branch in
> our country," Green said. "I would rather look at it again, sometime,
> when we don't have an executive taking a lot of power unto themselves."
> 
> In a worst-case scenario, a president could use the line-item veto
> threat as a wedge to punish or blackmail lawmakers, said Rep. Al Green,
> D-Houston.
> 
> "I am opposed to it," Green said. "I think it could become terribly
> politicized in the long run."
> 
> But Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, called line-item veto authority
> "a great idea."
> 
> "They ought to call it the 'public embarrassment for obscene pork bill,'
> and hopefully it will be a deterrent for some of these ridiculous
> earmarks," Brady said.
> 
> Spiraling federal spending is a potent election-year issue, and the
> Republican-led Congress feels pressure to appear fiscally responsible. A
> wave of lobbying scandals and renewed focus on thousands of earmarks,
> which are expenditures added to spending bills by individual lawmakers,
> have prompted criticism of congressional extravagance.
> 
> Stephen Hess, a communications professor and government scholar at
> George Washington University, said that neither earmarks nor line-item
> vetoes make a significant dent in the massive federal budget.
> 
> "It's just around the edges," Hess said. "Clearly line-item is aimed at
> keeping the budget down, but when you look at the expenditures it can
> keep down, given the size of the budget, you realize that although it
> shouldn't sound like petty change, it really is."
> 
> Clinton used his line-item veto 82 times in two years, and cut about $1
> billion in federal spending. The current federal budget is about $2.7
> trillion, and the national debt is $8.4 trillion.
> 
> The Senate Budget Committee recently approved a similar measure, as well
> as other budget reforms, but it was unclear when the full Senate might
> consider it.
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XISQkA/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to