"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 18:13:01 +0000, NOYB wrote:


Then why not give the President the line item veto? It would cut pork.

Didn't pay attention to the Republicans' Contract With America? The Line
Item Veto Act of 1996 was found unconstitutional. It violates the
Presentment clause of the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton...ty_of_New_York


"
On June 8, 2006, Viet D. Dinh, Professor of Law at Georgetown University
Law Center, and Nathan A. Sales, John M. Olin Fellow at Georgetown
University Law Center testified by written statement before the House
Committee on the Budget on the constitutional issues in connection with
the proposed legislation.[21] Dinh and Sales argued that the Legislative
Line Item Veto Act of 2006 satisfies the Constitution's Bicameralism and
Presentment Clause, and therefore avoids the constitutional issues raised
in the 1996 Act struck down by the Supreme Court. They also stated that
the proposed Act is consistent with the basic principle that grants
Congress broad discretion to establish procedures to govern its internal
operations.

The proposed Act was approved by the House Budget Committee on June 14,
2006 by a vote of 24-9.[1]

"


Actually do not need the line item veto, just overturn the court ruling that
the Executive branch had to spend all money allocated by the legislative
branch. Worked for nearly 200 years, until after Nixon was tossed and the
Congress got such a ruling.