BCT Editorial – 6/29/06

This page was last updated on June 29, 2006.

Power ploy; Editorial; Beaver County Times; June 29, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Congress continues to try to cede more power to the executive branch.”

[RWC] As you will read below, this editorial is intentionally misleading. I don’t want to say the author is lying because it’s possible he doesn’t understand how the line-item veto currently under consideration works.

The editorial wants us to believe the current version of a line-tem veto allows the president to pick and choose pieces of a bill to “scratch out” without the consent of Congress. As you will read below, that is incorrect.

“Last week, the House of Representatives voted to hand the president greater power to control spending by giving the chief executive so-called line-item veto power that would allow him to single out items contained in appropriations bills he would sign into law.”

[RWC] Not true. In this version of a “line-tem veto,” before the president signs a bill, he can identify line items with which he disagrees and send them back to Congress for an up or down vote. If Congress votes to keep all the specified line items in the bill, the president must either sign the bill as is or veto the bill in its entirety. That’s the same as today.

If Congress votes to agree with the president to eliminate any or all of the “vetoed” line items, Congress must present the president with an amended bill for the president to sign. The president must either sign the bill as is or veto the bill in its entirety. That’s the same as today.

“The measure, which faces an uncertain fate in the Senate, also would allow the president to use the line-item veto against increases in benefit programs and certain tax breaks.”

[RWC] Remember this position the next time you read an editorial complaining about budget deficits.

“This line-item veto vote is really an admission on the part of the 247 representatives who voted for it - 212 Republicans and 35 Democrats - that they are incapable of carrying out their constitutional responsibilities.”

[RWC] That must also be true for the legislatures of the 43 states that have their own line-item veto, including Pennsylvania. Given the editorial’s apparent distaste for the line-item veto, I wonder why the editorial isn’t calling for repeal of the PA line-item veto. Could it be that the current governor is a Democrat?

“Vote them out before they do any more harm and turn Congress, especially the House, into little more than a legislative lap dog for the executive branch. They are making a mockery of the separation of powers.”

[RWC] Exactly how does the bill passed by the House make “a mockery of the separation of powers?” As today, the president must either sign or veto bills in their entirety.

Was the Republican-majority Congress in 1996 “a legislative lap dog for the executive branch” when it passed the line-item veto when a Democrat president, Bill Clinton, was in office? Even with a Democrat president, Republicans overwhelmingly supported (House – 221–3; Senate – 50-3) the line-item veto. Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled that version of a line-item veto to be unconstitutional. In that version of a line-item veto, the president could sign the bill and unilaterally scratch out line items.