if he vetoes these bills allowing soldiers to come home in one year from today...
can it be said that he is acting on his own and is challenging the senate and house aggressively enough to be considered for impeachment?
2007-04-03 09:17:20 · 12 answers · asked by juanes addicion 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
ok...i know that bills in general are easily vetoed without a problem...
but..if he is to forge ahead without any support from the senate, house of representatives, and the general public...
doesn't that say something about how we have picked our presidents in the last 50 years with exception to Kennedy and Reagan?
2007-04-03 09:23:28 · update #1
"Get a grip on reality commie "
so if you are not for Bush...you're a commie...
good to know...
2007-04-03 09:24:45 · update #2
If you truly understood the checks and balance system, you wouldn't have asked this question. Of course the President will challenge Congress at times, that is part of the c & b's, too - Just as Congress will challenge the President. And, both houses of Congress are also free to override a veto, with enough votes.
2007-04-03 09:33:55 · answer #1 · answered by steddy voter 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Checks and Balances gives the chambers of Congress the chance to put forth legislation to the President. He has the legal right to veto it, in a number of ways. He can be balanced by a 3/4 vote of Congress overturning him. The fact is that 13 dems crossed to vote with the GOP on the bill, and only 2 Reps voted with the DEMS. So you can;t say that all of America, All of Congress is against him, that's false. More of America is behind the President than you think. Try getting your news somewhere other than CNN and Jon Stewart.
2007-04-03 16:26:18 · answer #2 · answered by redgralle 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
We can't impeach because a president butts heads with Congress. The checks and balances go both ways.
Yesterday's Supreme Court decision involving the EPA is proof that he isn't being allowed to run amuck. With a Democratic congress, he will not be able to press his agenda as freely as before, either.
I don't get your free pass to Reagan. Given his involvement in the Iran-Contra affair -- the only thing that kept him from being impeached by the house and convicted by the senate was the fact that he had a Republican house and Senate that let him get away with committing felonies.
2007-04-03 16:29:11 · answer #3 · answered by Ranto 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Lack of congressional or popular support is no grounds for impeachment of a president. Bulging the deficit beyond the Meaning of Life exploding point, doing everything in his power to direct income to wealthy buddies, ignoring any suggestion to contain the environment that did not make money for his social circle, involving the US in a useless and enormously expensive struggle to control a country that was never a threat to us -- none of these are impeachable offenses. Y'all elected him (ok, I can understand that) and reelected him (I can't). We shall all live with the consequences, unto our very grandchildren.
2007-04-03 16:36:08 · answer #4 · answered by obelix 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Get a grip on reality commie - he has every right to veto any bill. If your dems care so much about it then they had better start getting the required votes to override the veto. Apparently your commie university professor forgot to mention that.
2007-04-03 16:22:35 · answer #5 · answered by Dennis S 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No..you obviously have no understanding of how checks and balances work. Study up before you ask idiotic questions. If he vetoes it, then the Senate has the opportunity to override the veto, if they have enough votes.
You really should go back to school before you confuse people.
2007-04-03 16:26:11 · answer #6 · answered by Lolita 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Nope. Vetoing a bill is not grounds for an impeachment. Our law allows override if the Congress has bounds. OVERRIDE is your check and balance.
2007-04-03 16:20:26 · answer #7 · answered by wizjp 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Checks and balances are not "used against" someone. As for impeachment, you need an impeachable offense. He is not acting on his own as you suggest.
2007-04-03 16:21:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
While it is sad, the only system of checks and balances seems to be the media. If they get wind of a story and blow it out of proportion...actions will be taken. Otherwise the Pres. is pretty safe until his 4 yr term is up, then it is up to the electoral college to unltimately provide the check and balance...if he gets re-elected, he apparantly did a decent job, if not then he screwed up. Boom...accountability by the people, for the peole.
2007-04-03 16:21:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
this administration has claimed unprecedented power to the executive branch. Darth Cheney has been trying to do it since the days of Tricky Dick Nixon.
2007-04-03 16:23:55 · answer #10 · answered by Diggy 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋