There's no way, congress could override his veto, so really there's no threat of a cut off of funds, is there?
2007-01-25 12:24:16 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Accually, no, he can't. the Budget is not a law, it's just a funds allocation from the government that is solely within the hands of congress. The President submits a proposal, but it's congress that has to make the call.
2007-01-25 12:31:01 · answer #1 · answered by The Big Box 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It isn't a vote to cut off funds. It is a failure to vote for funding. According to the Constitution all tax legislation must originate in the House of Representatives and all spending authorizations must come from the Senate. It isn't exactly that clear cut but it is pretty close and adequate for this question.
It is essentially what happened when Vietnam fell. Our military was out and the Vietnamese military was doing the job. Then, as now, a Democrat controlled Senate did not renew the spending bill that would have continued to supply the South Vietnamese military. The country fell very shortly thereafter.
2007-01-25 12:37:37 · answer #2 · answered by gimpalomg 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Congress does not have to renew the funding bill, so that can cut off funding for the war. Bush can only veto new bills that pass by his desk, congress decides to renew them, plus bush has to ask congress for more money if he wants more than what he has available now. Since congress is 50 percent democrat, congress actually has alot of control over funding.
2007-01-25 12:31:28 · answer #3 · answered by Jason 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He can veto, but then Congress can go over that with either a 2/3 majority vote or 3/5s majority vote..cant remember which...
2007-01-25 12:30:34 · answer #4 · answered by Moops 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You cannot veto what is not passed. i.e. if the funding is never passed which they could do but won't then there is nothing to veto.
In other words they could choose not to fund his war. With the simple majority they have in the house and senate they could do just that. That is the threat.
They can't make Bush do anything with troop deployments. But they could and should start impeachment proceedings immediately.
2007-01-25 12:30:16 · answer #5 · answered by trichbopper 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Bush submits periodic budgets, its up to congress to pass them. He cannot veto what is not passed. You see, congress appropriates what is spent, there is no voting on what is not spent.
2007-01-25 12:31:17 · answer #6 · answered by trigunmarksman 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There is no threat of cutting funds. The Congress is powerless.
2007-01-25 12:32:01 · answer #7 · answered by Jared S 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Who's Lush?
2007-01-25 12:30:26 · answer #8 · answered by Dr. Nick 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think of the greater powerful question could be what do think of could ensue to congress in the event that they shrink off investment? the individuals of the United are solid whilst it is composed of a disaster. reducing off investment with out convey the troops abode first could be a disaster and could effect in political suicide for any politian. yet it particularly is purely my opinion. i could think of the suitable thank you to do it could be to rotate the troops out of the conflict zone first, then shrink off investment for the Iraq conflict.
2016-11-01 07:37:30 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
basically, if they cannot override his veto then the funds remain
2007-01-25 12:30:09 · answer #10 · answered by fade_this_rally 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋