Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

  1. #11
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    That won't be going anywhere. Congress gave Clinton the line item veto and SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional.
    This is different. Read the link.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  2. #12
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,870

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    I think this is a setup perpetrated by the Republicans and a smart one, at that.

    The Republicans don't think the Senate will act on this because they can't be sure that Obama will win re-election. That means that Reid will sit on this bill until after the election. The result is that the Republicans can point to the Senate Democrats as being obstructionists to a bill that their own President desires. This will do damage to the Democrats who are running for a Senate seat...increasing the possibility of the Republicans taking the Senate.

    Isn't politics fun!!
    TANSTAAFL

    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  3. #13
    Cynical Optimist
    jambalaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Last Seen
    11-28-12 @ 05:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,481

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    I've always liked the line item veto. It calls attention to the ridiculous spending measures attached to important bills that urgently need to be passed. If more spending bills and laws were considered on their own merit it would stop a lot of stupdity in Congress.

  4. #14
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    Obama's accomplishment???

    This isn't HIS doing...it's the House Republicans with a little help from some Democrats. They want to drop this in his lap, but I don't think the Senate Democrats are going to give it to him.
    Hopefully senate democrats don't give it to him. Its all good when your guy is in office and he is line item vetoing the stuff he and his party don't want and keeping everything he and has party wants, but its not all good when its the other guy and his party doing the same thing. This "the president will use it to cut waste" line is a load of garbage meant to sucker gullible people into supporting line item vetoes. If the president really wanted to cut waste then he would read the whole damn bill and veto the whole damn bill if there are some things in there he finds objectionable and tell senate and congress to work on another bill.
    Last edited by jamesrage; 02-10-12 at 10:52 AM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  5. #15
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,753

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    This is different. Read the link.
    I did read the link. What Congress is attempting to do will still be ruled unconstitutional, as it gives the president a say on how bills are crafted by Congress.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  6. #16
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,870

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Okay...even though I don't think this bill will ever cross the President's desk, here's my take:

    The problem we have here is that Congress sends the President a bill that is a combination of stuff he approves of and stuff he doesn't. The President is put in a "damned if he signs, damned if he doesn't" position. That's the way it is.

    I see the solution as the PEOPLE calling Congress to account for their actions. Perhaps the People should demand and vote for Congressmen who will not send the President poisoned bills. Perhaps the People should take a more conscious interest in what their Congressmen are doing.

    At any rate, the President does not need...nor does he deserve...any powers that are not enumerated in the Constitution. No matter what Party that President is from.
    TANSTAAFL

    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  7. #17
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Ummm....

    Didn't the Supreme Court strike down the line item veto as unconstitutional?

    Here's a Wikipedia link discusing the limited line item veto.

    Frankly, I don't see a difference between "limited" and "full" line item veto except that the bill as "lined out" would have to go back to Congress for a vote. In that case, it's really no different from what the President already does when he vetos a bill except under the Constitutional mechanism he has to attach a statement to the vetoed bill explaining why he vetoed such in the first place where upon Congress gets to revote on the proposed legislation again and can over-right the President's veto.

    To such, I wonder if Congress gets to vote down a bill containing such "pen and ink line-outs" and then revote on the original bill, thus, overriding a Presidential limited line item veto much as Art 1, Sect 7 calls for?

    Confused? So am I. (Guess it's time to once again do my homework and find this limited line item veto bill and study up on it alittle.)

    EDIT: Just noticed MaggieD's link above. Thanks!

    Also, to Mycroft and jamesrage,

    I think your posts #12, 14 and 16 are all spot on! You both rather articulated the problems with this limited line item veto pretty much as I see it - as both a political "Catch-22" for any President, but in particular for this incumbant, and a cluster F- as to its overall constitutionality on the grounds of encroachment once again on congressional enumerated powers.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 02-10-12 at 01:55 PM.

  8. #18
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,825

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    I think this is a setup perpetrated by the Republicans and a smart one, at that.

    The Republicans don't think the Senate will act on this because they can't be sure that Obama will win re-election. That means that Reid will sit on this bill until after the election. The result is that the Republicans can point to the Senate Democrats as being obstructionists to a bill that their own President desires. This will do damage to the Democrats who are running for a Senate seat...increasing the possibility of the Republicans taking the Senate.

    Isn't politics fun!!
    On the other hand, if the GOP tries to start running on the "OTHER SIDE IS OBSTRUCTIONIST" argument, they're just going to highlight how they have thrown up roadblocks for nearly every single bill the Democrats have put up.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  9. #19
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,870

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    On the other hand, if the GOP tries to start running on the "OTHER SIDE IS OBSTRUCTIONIST" argument, they're just going to highlight how they have thrown up roadblocks for nearly every single bill the Democrats have put up.
    Oh, I don't think it needs to be an obstructionist argument...rather a "we don't want to help Obama" argument.

    I don't think the Senate Democrats who are running for election want to get painted with that...could affect how their own base sees them.
    TANSTAAFL

    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  10. #20
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:05 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,570

    Re: House votes to give Obama limited line-item veto

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    If this were not an election year, I suppose the Democrats in the Senate would be fasttracking this bill. Since there is a question as to who will be the next President, I predict the Senate will sit on this.
    They passed this during the Clinton administration, too. It's just as invalid now -- this requires a Constitutional amendment.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •