Text 6940, 55 rader
Skriven 2010-04-12 08:32:28 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 6871 av Ward Dossche (2:292/854)
Ärende: Question about democracy
================================
Ward Dossche wrote to Bob Ackley on Sunday April 11 2010 at 13:58:

BA>> Which it unfortunately was.  IMO the president should veto on
BA>> principle *any* bill that has the word 'omnibus' ...

WD> If a head of state in its private capacity starts vetoeing bills then
WD> that equals running the country by a single person. The correct word
WD> for that is a dictatorship.

I wonder whether you really realize what's meant by a "line item veto", Ward.

The problem in the States is that if a president wants legislation, he can ask
allied congressmen to introduce a bill. The bill can then go through both
houses of congress and be signed into law by the president.

Or it can simply not be passed by congress. Or it can be "fillibustered" to
death in the senate (an opponent senator holds the chair and talks until the
session of congress ends and the bill automatically dies).

Or - and this is the nasty part - opponents of the bill can simply attach
amendments or riders that either make the bill do the opposite of what was
intended, or simply add expensive pet projects of congressional opponents to
the bill - projects that may be popular in one state or even only one
community, but that will have negative effects on the national situation. This
is often done when a president has what he (and his party in congress
considers) an important or even vital piece of legislation.

If the opponents can't kill the bill directly, they simply tack on enough (it
doesn't have to have anything to do with the bill, all they have to do is add
it to the legislation) to make the overall effect so negative that the
president is forced to veto his own bill in the end, since he has no authority
to change the bill once it reaches his desk - he has to sign all or nothing.

The saying "you have to take the bitter with the sweet" is literally true in
such a case, and this can put a president into a crisis of conscience: is the
bill _so_ important that he can somehow also accept the negative amendments and
riders that have been added to it?

A line item veto would permit a president to pass the original legislation but
not the additions that have been made to the bill along the congressional line.

Now, we're not talking about justified modifications in a law, not even about
things that have anything to do with the law - these are just things that are
added to the law by opposition congressmen as a "poison pill" to defeat
legislation they can't defeat by a fair vote in congress.

That's why some people - including me - think a president should have the right
to a line item veto. Sure, there's a chance it will be misused - but there's
misuse of the system right now because the president does _not_ have that
power.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)