Line Item Veto Paper
The line item veto came into effect January 1st, 1997 after being passed in an overwhelmingly Republican House, and the Senate, (with many objections by Senator Robert Byrd). However, the republican bill did not live for long, although it took a very long time to pass it, it was struck down in 1998 by a Supreme Court ruling. Although it was declared unconstitutional, President Bush still asks for it to this day, and it is likely that many more Republican presidents will. The implications of the bill, and the reasons around its end, form an ongoing challenge between Republican and Democratic views of the presidential power of the veto. The basics around the Line Item Veto stand as thus; its short lived glory under the administration of Clinton was an effective aid to his policy, as he made use of it 82 times in the one year that it lasted. Also it was a powerful tool in ridding the policy of federal expenses that only existed on bills to attract interest groups. Of course this angered Democrats, and so they thought, if outlawed, then bills that were mostly liked by presidents would still pass with the little lobbying amendments. As the Line Item Veto did not last long, there is not much history or usage
The perceived benefit, according to republican law makers, was that the line-item veto would primarily provide for greater discipline on government spending via the assertion that presidents have greater national prospective and ergo the ability to trim down legislation and spending hence helping out the tax payer. From the supreme courts prospective and several lawmakers the line-item veto violated the "separation of powers" aspect of the constitution by giving the president legislative power to alter legislation (Bok 274). Near the end of its existence line item veto would find interest groups on the frontlines primarily fighting against it. The main fear of the groups dealt with the possibility that the president may cut federal salaries in order to maintain the budget. Since the Supreme Court ruling, the line item veto is still debated in Congress, where as the Republicans still support it, and wish to see it reenacted. The line item veto was opposed by the majority of Democratic representatives, but because Congress was dominated by Republicans, it passed anyway in 1996, and went into effect January 1, 1997. The Veto was already law in forty-three states at this time and helped to cut wasteful spending and to balance the budget. The bill passed in the House of Representatives and (despite Senator Robert Byrd's best efforts) the Senate. The president could either delay funds(called a deferral authority) or he could cancel funds entirely(called a rescission authority) The president is then required to send s "special message" in which he must identify the amounts, benefits, items, and etc. For better or worse this policy can be considered a temporary extension of the executive branches veto powers, which in the end was found unconstitutional. com/wp-srv/politics/special/budget/stories/041096. html)From the republican prospective, which originally endorsed the idea of a line-item veto, one can understand the real as well as perceived cost and benefits to the line-item veto policy idea. The history of the Line Item Veto really does not deal with the way it was shaped, because it had even been around since the Civil War.
Common topics in this essay:
Item Veto,
Senior Despite,
line item,
Supreme Court,
Worker's Union,
line item veto,
item veto,
Robert Byrd's,
George Bush,
Paul Stevens,
Line Item,
President Bush,
Civil War,
line-item veto,
supreme court,
disapproval bill,
veto policy,
veto powers,
power line,
separation powers,
bill veto,
power line item,
1998 supreme court,
item veto history,
powers disapproval bill,
|
Acceptance Essays
