View Poll Results: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    22 50.00%
  • No

    19 43.18%
  • Undecided

    3 6.82%
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 88

Thread: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

  1. #11
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,561

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    A line item veto would not eliminate pork. It would limit pork from the other side. The pork from the presidents side would still be left in.
    better to eliminate half he pork than no pork at all.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  2. #12
    Sage


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

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    A line item veto would not eliminate pork. It would limit pork from the other side. The pork from the presidents side would still be left in.
    Perhaps. But election year would put the blame where it belongs...on the President's desk. The bridge to nowhere could have cost the president his re-election.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    It gives the president the power to override congress and take away any chance at compromise when the houses are not of the same party as the executive. Yes, the veto can function in that way, but it's much more blunt and there is a cost to throwing out an entire bill. Picking and choosing elements of bills, even if I agree with whoever the president might be at the time, gives that person too much power.
    What compromise is there on a bridge to nowhere? (I particularly like that example, as everybody gets it.) Look, it's not working as it stands. How about a trial period? Ha!
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  3. #13
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    better to eliminate half he pork than no pork at all.
    You do not see the massive potential for abuse there? With one fell swoop, presidents could ensure that those on the other side do very little for their constituents. How do you think that would help their chances of getting re-elected.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #14
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Perhaps. But election year would put the blame where it belongs...on the President's desk. The bridge to nowhere could have cost the president his re-election.



    What compromise is there on a bridge to nowhere? (I particularly like that example, as everybody gets it.) Look, it's not working as it stands. How about a trial period? Ha!
    Could have, but almost certainly wouldn't. How many people who voted for it got re-elected?
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #15
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,561

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    You do not see the massive potential for abuse there? With one fell swoop, presidents could ensure that those on the other side do very little for their constituents. How do you think that would help their chances of getting re-elected.
    The president couldn't write more pork into the bills he signed, only eliminate it. If he wanted to help out his party, which does seem to be the real goal of both parties just now, he's be more inclined to eliminate pork from the other party (whichever that one is). That's why the line item veto would add to the power of the executive branch, and have to be balanced by giving the Congress another power to keep the balance.
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  6. #16
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    You do not see the massive potential for abuse there? With one fell swoop, presidents could ensure that those on the other side do very little for their constituents. How do you think that would help their chances of getting re-elected.
    And unlike the pork that could be eliminated, the tax burden would still be equally felt throughout all 50 states.

    On the surface a line item veto seems like a wonderful thing. Perhaps it WOULD be if both parties were populated with representatives that were invested in the good of the country and not the good of the party.

  7. #17
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:11 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,331
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    The president couldn't write more pork into the bills he signed, only eliminate it. If he wanted to help out his party, which does seem to be the real goal of both parties just now, he's be more inclined to eliminate pork from the other party (whichever that one is). That's why the line item veto would add to the power of the executive branch, and have to be balanced by giving the Congress another power to keep the balance.
    The president does not need to be able to write more pork to screw the other party and play politics in a way that simply should not be done.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Somewhat different subject, but I agree that all bills should be limited to a single item. That would eliminate the need for a line-item veto, also.
    I agree that each bill should be for one single subject. Omnibus pork bills are a crock, in my opinion.

    I wonder what would happen if a president just began vetoing any bill that was not on a single subject. Could that president institute an effective line-item veto?

  9. #19
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,705

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    There is a better solution than the Line Item Veto. It would make a huge difference if the federal powers and roles were reduced in the first place and those 'pork' projects were state and locally funded and mandated.

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Penn's Woods
    Last Seen
    09-01-12 @ 09:09 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,984

    Re: Should the President have "line-item veto" power?

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    There is a better solution than the Line Item Veto. It would make a huge difference if the federal powers and roles were reduced in the first place and those 'pork' projects were state and locally funded and mandated.
    Totally agree, but in order to reduce federal power and roles, we need to change legislation, no? Is there another way?

Page 2 of 9 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
  •