2007-06-07 08:00:43 · 11 answers · asked by Trav 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No. If the President wants to control spending in that way, he can just keep sending the bill back to Congress, unsigned and keep listing the parts of the bill he objects to until they, override his veto, or draft a version of the bill he is willing to sign.
2007-06-07 08:19:45 · answer #1 · answered by Mike W 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Line item veto can be a two-edged sword cutting justly and unjustly; used as a threat, or a bludgeon, by a vindictive, partisan President, can harm the country. On the other hand, if Congress is populated with those who hold the best interests of this country at heart, and have the moral fortitude to stand up and be counted, they can keep the field just, or level. Congress is the key to a great country, or to a second rate country. Look at the direction of our country, and you be the judge on Congress. Given a good congress, a line item veto, with specific limitations, is a great idea. If we ever get Congress straight, it will be easier to get the office of Presidency corrected. All national political branches of government, have erred from their Constitutional direction, and need correction. Every branch has been guilty of making laws. Making laws is the sole prerogative of Congress. We need to return to that Constitutional position. The House of Representatives is legally responsible to appropriate the money spent by the Federal government of this country. They often abdicate that responsibility. Once the House accepts, and honorably discharges their responsibility, things will get much better. What our country needs is a group of non-politicians to form a budget cutting committee; preferably older men and women who are reasonable in their frugality and application of economics, who know the Constitution, to make some solid recommendations to Congress and the President, with a commitment on their part to accept the principles of the recommendations, even if they disagree with some of the specifics.
2016-04-01 08:17:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO!!! The power of the money should go to congress. If you give the president line item veto, that gives the presidency way too much power. The way to control spending is to get the lobbyists and corporations out of our political process.
2007-06-07 08:12:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I thought it would be a good idea at one time but I've changed my mind.
Take for instance a president from, lets say Texas. Then the congressmen (R) from Texas adds tons of pork to a bill. And a congressmen from New York (D) adds pork to that same bill. Guess which line-item will be vetoed?
I think Bills should contain only what pretains to that bill.
2007-06-07 08:07:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think there should have been a Presidential line Item veto long ago!
2007-06-07 08:04:26 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nope. It is the power, and the duty, of Congress to pass appropriate legislation. Giving the President the power to basically edit legislation would effectively neuter Congress, gutting the whole Constitutional system.
2007-06-07 08:14:41 · answer #6 · answered by thegubmint 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have always thought so. Everyone blames the President over spending but his power to control it is very limited. That goes for all Presidents not just the current one.
2007-06-07 08:04:06 · answer #7 · answered by Brian 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Supreme Court said ,NO,gives the president too much power.
2007-06-07 08:04:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
NO. The power of purse should remain with the Congress.
2007-06-07 08:03:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. It would violate the separation of powers in our constitution
2007-06-07 08:04:40 · answer #10 · answered by espreses@sbcglobal.net 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋