Comments on: Line Item Veto? http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510 A rough draft of my thoughts... Sat, 18 Nov 2025 05:35:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: eric http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-466471 Tue, 07 Mar 2025 23:11:50 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-466471 why is it that something which seems, at least to me, blatantly unconstitutional could have been be supported by the "strict constructionist" Scalia? And now, if the court is configured correctly, then roberts & alito must be willing to disregard the constitution in this case. And yet, weren't they made with the "strict constructionist" model also? At least that's what they indicated in the Senate hearings. I don't get it. why is it that something which seems, at least to me, blatantly unconstitutional could have been be supported by the “strict constructionist” Scalia? And now, if the court is configured correctly, then roberts & alito must be willing to disregard the constitution in this case. And yet, weren’t they made with the “strict constructionist” model also? At least that’s what they indicated in the Senate hearings.

I don’t get it.

]]> by: Jan http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-466203 Tue, 07 Mar 2025 14:02:09 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-466203 I can't help but think that if they are willing to try it again so soon, they must know something that we don't. Maybe they <strong>believe</strong> that the court is now configured in such a way as to let it stand. (I'm not saying that it is necessarily, I'm just saying they must now think that it is or they wouldn't waste their time. I've just never understood why the Congress was ever willing to pass the line/item veto in the first place. It would seem that it would greatly reduce their ability to bring the pork back home to their individual districts. I can’t help but think that if they are willing to try it again so soon, they must know something that we don’t. Maybe they believe that the court is now configured in such a way as to let it stand. (I’m not saying that it is necessarily, I’m just saying they must now think that it is or they wouldn’t waste their time.

I’ve just never understood why the Congress was ever willing to pass the line/item veto in the first place. It would seem that it would greatly reduce their ability to bring the pork back home to their individual districts.

]]> by: A Stitch in Haste http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-464849 Mon, 06 Mar 2025 17:42:02 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-464849 <strong>What Part of "Unconstitutional" is Unclear?</strong> Many people, myself included, scratched our heads when we heard President Bush ask in his most recent State of the Union Address for Congress to pass legislation granting the President the line-item veto. We were puzzled because we had jus... What Part of “Unconstitutional” is Unclear?

Many people, myself included, scratched our heads when we heard President Bush ask in his most recent State of the Union Address for Congress to pass legislation granting the President the line-item veto.

We were puzzled because we had jus…

]]> by: Matthew Shugart http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-464531 Mon, 06 Mar 2025 15:48:09 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-464531 It looks to me like a repeat of that case would now be 5-4 (because I would guess Roberts would be in favor, though I would have assumed Rehnquist would have been, too, so who knows). If that is accurate, then it may not be a great stretch to think that a statute could be crafted in such a way as to get one more vote, with Scalia being the obvious target (there can be no doubt that Alito would take the same position as the justice he replaced). Similar presidential powers in other presidential systems point to the conclusion that the item veto is a <i>terrible</i> idea. It looks to me like a repeat of that case would now be 5-4 (because I would guess Roberts would be in favor, though I would have assumed Rehnquist would have been, too, so who knows). If that is accurate, then it may not be a great stretch to think that a statute could be crafted in such a way as to get one more vote, with Scalia being the obvious target (there can be no doubt that Alito would take the same position as the justice he replaced).

Similar presidential powers in other presidential systems point to the conclusion that the item veto is a terrible idea.

]]> by: KipEsquire http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-464368 Mon, 06 Mar 2025 15:06:09 +0000 http://poliblogger.com/?p=9510#comment-464368 Of course, Congress could simply pass each expenditure as a separate bill, which the President could then sign or veto individually. Oh wait, that would mean passing a few million bills each year? Go figure... Of course, Congress could simply pass each expenditure as a separate bill, which the President could then sign or veto individually.

Oh wait, that would mean passing a few million bills each year?

Go figure…

]]>