Senate Line Item Veto

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by beezel26, Jan 7, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. beezel26 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2003
    star 7
    I know the tea party isn't really liked but one thing I don't understand is why didn't they get a line item veto. Listen, they may not like Obama but give him and future presidents a line item veto any you will save more money then lost to obamacare and defense spending. If the tea party wants to retain their power they must seek a line item veto. They will get more from obama and the democrats then from their own party. If they want to give citizens back their power then give the president a line item veto. No more pork.
  2. A Chorus of Disapproval New Films Riot Deterrent

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Aug 19, 2003
    star 7
    EDIT: Oh, suddenly this is a "Senate" thread, so my witty pictorial response is a violation. Thanks, beezel...
    Last edited by A Chorus of Disapproval, Jan 7, 2013
    DarthBoba likes this.
  3. George Roper Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Oct 31, 2012
    star 4
  4. Point Given Mod of Literature and Community

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Dec 12, 2006
    star 5
    The Supreme Court ruled (correctly, in my opinion) that the line item veto violated the Presentment Clause in the Constitution. Considering that three of the justices in the majority are still on the court, it will be a long time (if ever) that we'll see the line item veto in action.

    Source
  5. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    This doesn't have any grammatical errors, I'm just quoting it because it makes so little sense.


    Also what PointGiven said.
  6. Juliet316 Streak for Colors Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    I agree that it'll be a long time, if ever before the line - item veto ever comes up again, but I disagree that it should have been struck down. It could have helped (if used properly), curtail a lot of pork spending in Washington.
  7. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    The question in the OP isn't whether the Supreme Court should have ruled differently, it's "why didn't the Tea Party seek the line item veto?" and the answer is "because it's unconstitutional."
  8. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    When was the last time we had the line item veto?

    Also, the Tea Party hates Obama...they almost certainly hate him more than they want to save money. The last thing they'd do is support giving the POTUS the power to delete legislation at his liking while he's in office, whether it might save money or not.
    Last edited by Alpha-Red, Jan 7, 2013
  9. jp-30 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Dec 14, 2000
    star 9
  10. EmpireForever Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2004
    star 8
    Oh is that what the line-item veto is about? I was going to ask but I didn't want to look foolish.
  11. Point Given Mod of Literature and Community

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Dec 12, 2006
    star 5
    Do you honestly believe it would be used properly, by any president? You're not a fan of the GOP, from what I've seen from your posts. Eventually a Republican will get in the White House again. Would you be comfortable with him/her having the line item veto at his/her disposal?
  12. Ghost Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2003
    star 6
    We only had a Line-Item Veto for a short time during the Clinton years, and then it was ruled unconstitutional.

    If the Tea Party, or anyone, wants the Line-Item Veto... introduce a constitutional amendment. That's the only thing that can be done in this area now.


    EDIT: the idea of the Line-Item Veto is very old, though. The Confederates included it in their constitution during the Civil War.
    Last edited by Summer Dreamer, Jan 7, 2013
  13. Juliet316 Streak for Colors Bonanza Winner

    Game Winner
    Member Since:
    Apr 27, 2005
    star 7
    Edit: @Summer Dreamer beat me too it.

    @Point Given I'm actually not too terribly wild about either party (which is why I declare myself more or less an independent voter these days), but Virginia has had a line - item veto for a while and I do believe by and large with some exceptions it has been used responsibly by Governors of both parties here.
    Last edited by Juliet316, Jan 7, 2013
  14. beezel26 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2003
    star 7
    Line item veto stops pork barrel spending. It can be used to gut some bills but with the threat of a line item veto then the bill doesn't go ahead. Its much more useful for budgets and extra spending. This way you can actually prevent lobbyists from pushing for stuff along with wasteful spending. You would also stop the use of bribing congressmen for votes with a line item veto. If they know they wont gain power out of it then they lose that power and actually have to vote the way they see fit. Not the way that will most benefit their reelection campaign.
    Juliet316 likes this.
  15. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    Putting temp lock on this since with the opening post, I don't follow the discussion you're intending to generate as it's a bit thin, and doesn't seem to give the thread solid footing. PM if you'd like to either a. change it over to a JCC tag or b. give me a bit more thorough first section that introduces the topic (and gives it some direction or context) rather than one that seems more like it's a response to a question/prompt that's not present here

    Either option works so PM what you want to do.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.