It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
House Republicans put aside their usual antipathy toward President Barack Obama on Wednesday to give the president, and his successors, the line-item veto, a constitutionally questionable power over the purse that long has been sought by presidents of both parties.
A minority of Democrats joined in casting a 254-173 vote in favor of allowing the president to pick out specific items in spending bills for elimination. Currently, the chief executive must sign or veto spending bills in their entirety.
In 1996, a Republican-controlled Congress succeeded in giving line-item veto authority to another Democratic president, Bill Clinton. He exercised that authority 82 times, and although Congress overrode his veto in 38 instances, the moves saved the government almost $2 billion.
But in 1998, on a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that the law was unconstitutional, saying it violated the principle that Congress, and not the executive branch, holds the power of the purse.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I really think this is a good idea personally. Whatever trouble Obama can cause with it will be more than countered by the damage prevented in a Pelosi type Congress (extreme) with..say a Ron Paul or other conservative type President. This doesn't let the President do new things, just stop very specific things from being done out of Congress. I think that distinction makes all the difference for it being a power that actually is long over due, regardless of who is President.
Just my own two cents.
Originally posted by bekod
for me it would be alright if it was used to end the mind numbing disagreements that go on take the 2% tax reduction , the POTUS would say "ok, you will not act I will 2% tax reduction now in effect as by EO" or like the super 12 no out come EO applys you had your chance now it is my turn , or you want 15% pay raise i think not EO says so EO= executive order
Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic
I must admit to being a little ambivalent about the line item veto for pres...
However, given that the current House has passed this, I am TOTALLY against it. Bohner and his fellow clowns have some non-stated goal, here, whose intent is to screw the majority of the US population, and Obama if they can manage it.
Something smells really rotten here.
Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by DenyObfuscation
no it is not , P for Puppet if you must know, if the pres requested it then yes Dictator would fit but seeing as the Congress suggested it making a Pres A Puppet to them then yes POTUS it is