Line Item Veto request for King George

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
definitely

the Presidency is granted its powers Constitutionally

for some reason, the democrats are doing everything they can to take power away from the office

power of veto is granted to the executive branch as part of checks and balances

since that power is taken away by Congress with its current way of abusing the system, it must be put back so that this abuse of power can be held in check
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
smurphy said:
....Then when there's eventually a dem prez, they will get revenge by doing the opposite.
.

thats why CHARACTER MATTERS in electing a President

notice how GWB failed to intervene in a matter in Tom Daschle's home state after Daschle's opponent said he would be better able to have the President's ear...a typical case of pork barrel politics
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
dr. freeze said:
for some reason, the democrats are doing everything they can to take power away from the office
for some reason, the republicans are doing everything possible to increase power to the president
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
smurphy said:
Accountable to who? He's already accountable for the massive deficit, but nobody cares.


He would at least have to explain why he voted to fund Alaskan bridges to nowhere and indoor rainforests. Currently he doesn't.

I think that your idea would hold up legitimate legislation while this panel tried to unlock their endless 2-2 vote.

All of this ridiculous pork is given a green light as it is. What harm can come from having a president explaining why he approved it? No matter what the party.

Also, people definitely care about the massive deficit and a lot of other things with this admin and in large numbers.

The only question is whether the democrats can come up with a cohesive message and a candidate with a pulse in 2008.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
Well, I don't trust giving more power to the prez in exchange for him simply being "more accountable". Perhaps if we chose my precious 4 person panel in a way that they are as far removed from politics as possible - pure economists - then they could make the cuts as unbiased as possible. Perhaps it's not an idea that would work, but at least I'm exercising my noggin.

The population is so partisan in general, I could see all the Republicans justifying the bridge to nowhere. I just can't see Bush's accountability doing anything to cut pork from his own side. He fears nothing and has yet to pay for any of his decisions. His followers back him up every time and rationalize bridges to nowhere.

To be fair, the same exact blind loyalty and ridiculous rationalizing will happen on ther side as well. Just doesn't seem like a solution.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
I read a good story on this today, I will find it and post the link. It required a lot, but would make people accountable for the add-ons and sounded sensible to me.

SMurphy, thanks for calling out Freeze on his ridiculous comment about Democrats trying to take power away from this administration. That is probably the most laughable comment I've read on this board, including some from Larry and Charles.

And he follows it up with character being important in electing a President. And he says he doesn't drink the current administration's Kool-Aid...and college kids getting a student loan from the government are the ones that are drunk. That's NOT Kool-Aid you're drinking, Freeze. And nobody is drinking the round you tried to buy here.
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
You have to have the line item veto, or stand alone bills in congress, that's the only way to cut the pork barrel crap that goes on in both parties.

The way our type of gov is set up, it lends itself to this type of crap so incumbents can get re elected and nothing else.

The idea of tax dollars from CA pay for a dam or building project in Michigan is absurd.

I would much rather see stand alone bills more than the line item veto, that way when these idiots senators/house members want to fund their pork barrel programs it will be right out there to see and understand exactly what it is they want. :cursin: :shocked:
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
Here is that story. I cut it down to just deal with the specifics of the plan. It deals specifically with Defense Department Pork, which is probably one of the top areas where our tax dollars go to line pockets of THIS administrations contacts. Maybe if it was tougher to grab for money, we wouldn't have all those tag alongs by special interests.

-------

A simple but difficult solution

Recalling the nature of pork, that it is of an unknown quality intended for a specific recipient of unknown worthiness, the solution is to impose due diligence on the process. In other words, each congressional earmark for additional spending in the defense budget should be the subject of the following:

1. An estimate of the cost from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The estimate should include both the first year and the next five. An objective assessment (i.e., not one from the contractor or other advocates) of the cost, including whether there is a camel attached to that nose under the tent, is needed.

2. An evaluation by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), or another reputable evaluation entity with no contract relationship with any defense program, on the effectiveness and appropriateness of the proposed spending.

3. A written statement on the desirability of the earmark from the manager in DOD, whether civilian or military, who would oversee implementation of the project. The intent of this requirement is to put on the public record DOD program managers who today circumvent the authority of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Office of Management and Budget, and the White House by quietly agreeing to more money for their projects, or to start new projects, without authorization from their own hierarchy. [6]

4. Detailed explanation in committee reports and conference reports of the nature of each earmark, its short and long term costs, and its worth as identified by GAO and CBO, together with the identity of any member of Congress seeking the earmark.

5. A requirement that any earmark that makes it through this process can only be awarded to a contractor after complete and open nation-wide contract competition.

Some, probably many, in Congress will oppose these suggestions; clearly they would subvert the intent of many members to steer government spending toward selected interests for purposes that may or may not advance national security. However, were there to be in Congress, especially the Senate, members who seek genuine reform, there are tools at their disposal to help them impose their will. Senate rules have been specifically designed to assist them in this regard; all that is needed is the will to do so.

It would likely not be a pretty fight, but it would definitely be worth watching. And it would help the country separate the real reformers from the rest.

Winslow T. Wheeler is the Director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information. He spent 31 years working for US Senators from both parties and the Government Accountability Office. He contributed an essay on the defense budget to CounterPunch's new book: Dime's Worth of Difference. Wheeler's new book, "The Wastrels of Defense: How Congress Sabotages U.S. Security," is published by the Naval Institute Press.
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
Here is that story. I cut it down to just deal with the specifics of the plan. It deals specifically with Defense Department Pork, which is probably one of the top areas where our tax dollars go to line pockets of THIS administrations contacts. Maybe if it was tougher to grab for money, we wouldn't have all those tag alongs by special interests.


Why don't you get off this crap about this administration contacts, you don't think every administration has it's corrupt situations. Remeber the 150 dollar toilet seats during Clinton etc.


BELIEVE ME REPUBLICANS DO NOT CORNER THE MARKET IN THIS AREA.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
ctownguy said:
Why don't you get off this crap about this administration contacts, you don't think every administration has it's corrupt situations. Remeber the 150 dollar toilet seats during Clinton etc.

BELIEVE ME REPUBLICANS DO NOT CORNER THE MARKET IN THIS AREA.

I will not get off this administration and it's contacts, as I sincerely believe this administration is the most corrupt I have ever witnessed - at least from a monetary view. I don't think that is a real stretch, considering what we have witnessed, and continue to witness. And I'm speaking mainly of money-related corruption and favoritism at sheer dollar levels. It's my opinion, based on a lot of serious questions that cannot be washed away by trying to pretend things are equal, or compare completely different scenarios and situations.

I think there is corruption at all levels, in both parties, agreed. But I think we are seeing a new high in corruption with this bunch. I'm guessing the cost of a toilet seat in this administration probably far surpasses $150.
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
Chadman said:
I will not get off this administration and it's contacts, as I sincerely believe this administration is the most corrupt I have ever witnessed - at least from a monetary view. I don't think that is a real stretch, considering what we have witnessed, and continue to witness. And I'm speaking mainly of money-related corruption and favoritism at sheer dollar levels. It's my opinion, based on a lot of serious questions that cannot be washed away by trying to pretend things are equal, or compare completely different scenarios and situations.

I think there is corruption at all levels, in both parties, agreed. But I think we are seeing a new high in corruption with this bunch. I'm guessing the cost of a toilet seat in this administration probably far surpasses $150.

Pathetic

Unreal how deep the hate runs from you on the left. It is satisfying seeing you and your kind boil in your own hatred and can do absolutely nothing about it.
 

bryanz

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 8, 2001
9,724
35
48
64
Syracuse ny, usa
Ctownguy,whether you know it or not we are all in the pot with him,you are pathetic to back this or any administration these clowns on the left or the right have put up in the last four elections. You just sit back and regurgitate that bull shit they feed you about the left and the right as our country goes to hell. Does it make you feel good when you can put someone down on the left ? This has become a game and most of us on the left and right will not win. The politicians are winning; it should be we the people against them. Most of us have fallen into the trap. We the people need to Wake up. How can so many be taken over by so few ?
 

StevieD

Registered User
Forum Member
Jun 18, 2002
9,509
44
48
72
Boston
Why don't you get off this crap about this administration contacts said:
Once again you have it wrong Ctown

The military procurement horror tales of the early 1980s -- immortalized by
the $435 claw hammer, the $640 toilet seat and $7,600 coffee makers -- .
When President Ronald Reagan first heard of the outrageous overcharging on
ABC's 20/20, which exposed the labyrinthine military purchasing bureaucracy
that allowed $1,118.26 to be paid for a spare plastic cap for a navigator's
stool on a B-52 bomber (worth about two cents), he demanded answers from
Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger.


Weinberger promised Reagan he would determine the malefactors and punish
them, but instead he appeared on Capitol Hill and defended the shocking
prices. Outraged, Washington Post cartoonist Herblock lampooned Weinberger
by drawing a toilet seat around his neck. The seat remained around his neck
as long as Weinberger remained in office.

It is true that Clinton also overpaid for much. Many of the overpayments went to Brown and Root.
Maybe somebody should check up on the management of a company that would cheat the United States. Now, where would we ever find the CEO of the parent company of B and R.... Haliburton.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
ctownguy said:
Pathetic

Unreal how deep the hate runs from you on the left. It is satisfying seeing you and your kind boil in your own hatred and can do absolutely nothing about it.

I have to say that I don't hate George Bush. And you really know very little about me, to make an ASSessement like that. Do I distrust him based on what I have witnessed over the past few years? Yes. Do I think he takes a bad rap at times for things people in his administration do? Yes.

If you are satisfied by thinking that I am boiling in hatred (man...is THAT dramatic...) then bully for you. But I certainly can do something about it. I can speak my mind and educate myself, and try to affect change where I think it should take place. I can also vote, and try to convince others to do the same. I can contact my senators and congresspeople and voice my views.

I don't hate George Bush. He seems to - many times - be a pretty likeable guy in a good 'ol boy kinda way, other than being kind of dismissive and egotistical. I don't think he is a good President for a lot of reasons and I certainly do not trust the party line and many of the things I am asked to believe. And for good reason, I think.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
ctownguy said:
I would much rather see stand alone bills more than the line item veto, that way when these idiots senators/house members want to fund their pork barrel programs it will be right out there to see and understand exactly what it is they want. :cursin: :shocked:
Yes - I think this would be the best plan. Does this idea ever get any momentum?
 

ctownguy

Life is Good
Forum Member
Jul 27, 2000
3,065
16
0
SoCal
smurphy said:
Yes - I think this would be the best plan. Does this idea ever get any momentum?

It was mentioned a few times but never gets anywhere because too many fear it and I know all you lefties will scream, but it has been introduced by the right and always shot down by the left and yes by some of the republicans that can't or won't give up this style of politics. But it is the democrats that would never allow this to go thru.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Channel Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,910
135
63
16
L.A.
If it is indeed all on the Dems why that won't go through, then why is it that there are just as many pork barrel bills generated from the Republicans?

Also, what makes the Reps think a line item veto could pass if they can't get anywhere on the single item bill passage thingy? Logic would say they'd have a better chance on the former.

I got to take the view of Bryan on this one. Both sides appear to comspire to keep it all f**ked up. Stand alone bills would be fair, Line item veto is just a power grab.
 

Chadman

Realist
Forum Member
Apr 2, 2000
7,501
42
48
SW Missouri
ctownguy, can you show us a link to this info? I'm not saying it is not the case, but I'd like to see where a Republican introduced this plan and democrats shot it down. I am not screaming about it...I brought this up a long time ago about what can be done about getting the special interests out of the budget. So, please show us something tangible and not just your commentary. I'd love to see this, and it is definitely something I would question my local representation about.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top