Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Congress: Be Wary of Line-Item Veto

Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Congress: Be Wary of Line-Item Veto

Article excerpt

THE alacrity with which President Clinton has embraced the idea of a line-item veto ought to make the Republicans in Congress pushing the proposal think twice.

A line-item veto would mean a massive shift of power from Congress to the president. Mr. Clinton has obviously figured this out. But have the Republicans? And if so, why do they keep pushing the matter?

In its pure form, the line-item veto would require amendment of the Constitution. It would give the president power to veto individual items in appropriations bills. The president has to sign or veto the whole bill; he cannot pick and choose among individual items. Congress then votes on whether to override the veto, with a two-thirds vote required.

With line-item veto authority, the president could veto separately as many items of an appropriation bill as he chooses. Congress would then vote separately on overriding each item vetoed.

The argument is that the line-item veto would give the president a weapon to combat wasteful pork-barrel projects coming from Capitol Hill. Many, perhaps most, appropriation bills have such projects tucked away somewhere - money to dredge a small river; to build a highway in some obscure congressional district; to establish a research laboratory in somebody's favorite university; even, to the horror of Republicans, money in this year's crime bill to subsidize midnight basketball.

Few of these projects could withstand rigorous cost-benefit analysis. Jimmy Carter mounted a valiant crusade against western water projects and went down to ignominious defeat. Ronald Reagan started a campaign for the line-item veto as a way to thwart congressional spendthrifts. George Bush continued the argument. Now Clinton has joined the presidential parade.

THE argument is made, irrelevantly, that many governors have this power and therefore the president should have it, too. But a governor is not the president. A state legislature is not Congress. A state is not the national government.

Presidents want the line-item veto because it would increase their power to shape the priorities of our national government. Conservatives supported this during the Reagan-Bush years because they could not persuade Congress to cut off appropriations for certain social programs. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.