Vote Tally Count Line Item Veto


House Vote On Passage: H.R. 3521: Expedited Legislative Line-Item Veto and Rescissions Act of 2011

Since the House cannot get its act together to cut spending, lets give Obama more power. So much for the Tea Party.Ryan fails to appreciate that in the future the GOP may not have control of the House and able to recind the cuts. For individual votes, click on the various “Blue Sorts” below.  Gov Track

Number: House Vote #46 in 2012 [primary source: house.gov]
Date: Feb 8, 2012 4:17PM
Result: Passed
Bill: H.R. 3521: Expedited Legislative Line-Item Veto and Rescissions Act of 2011
Vote

District

Representative

The 254-173 roll call Wednesday by which the House passed a bill that gives the president the line-item veto, or authority to pick out specific items in spending bills for elimination.

The bill differs from the line-item veto authority that President Clinton had in the mid- to late 1990s, which he could use to veto specific spending proposals within an overall bill. That authority was found to be unconstitutional, since it gave the executive branch the power of the purse, which rightly belongs to Congress. Sure glad we found a way to fix that! The Constitution can be so annoying!

The bill approved today would allow the president to make rescission recommendations, within 45 days of passage, that have to be acted on by Congress.

The lead sponsors of the bill, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and ranking member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), said the required action by Congress means it is consistent with the Constitution.

During debate, that assertion was challenged by Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee. Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) said the bill is enough of a shift of power toward the executive branch and away from the Congress that it raises constitutional questions.

“The line-item veto would weaken that power, shifting budgetary authority to the executive branch and giving the president a power that our founding fathers did not see fit to give him,” Rogers said. “The framers would surely shake their heads at the idea of transferring this much authority to the executive branch.”

The debate split Republicans on the Appropriations and Budget committees, and some Budget Committee members rose to the defense of the bill by saying Congress has shown an unwillingness to use its authority to cut spending.

“Spending has run rampant in Washington, and it’s because ‘no’ is not a word that Congress is used to when it comes to spending,” Rep. Reid Ribble (R-Wis.) said.

One member of the Appropriations Committee, Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), bucked his GOP colleagues on that committee and said he supports the bill.

“I lose no sleep at night over whether a president of my party or the other party can take action to … send back some spending that we have done here and force Congress reaffirm it,” he said.  Full StoryThe Hill

7 Responses to “Vote Tally Count Line Item Veto”

  1. Conservatives on Fire Says:

    Bunker, help me out on this one. I’m thinking back to the 70s maybe. Then the idea behind the the line item veto was if a President has the right to veto any bill, why shouldn’t the President be able to veto some parts of a bill. The concept was promoted as a way to stop pork projects that are often added onto important bills. Most of these add-ons would never pass the Congress on a stand alone basis.
    Now after reading your post, I see how this power could be abused. Maybe what we need is a bill that says no amendments to bill are allowed. All bills must pass or fail on a stand alone basis. That would put an end to a lot of the pork.

    Like

    • bunkerville Says:

      JIm, as Mark Levin said on his program last nigt, it depends on the President and how much you trust him. Generally I would support this, but for Obama, no. Yes indeed, no amendments to me would be a better approach. I do understand that Congress would want a say in how some money is spent in their state as opposed to a beaurcrat, but they are all so corrupt now.

      Like

  2. silverfiddle Says:

    Until they make real cuts in bureaucracy and budget, it’s all kabuki. They are rearranging deck furniture…

    Like

    • bunkerville Says:

      Pitiful SF. I still think it is dangerous. He could cut the military and when it goes back to the House, who knows who will control it. More important, does anyone really know what is in the damn bill, or is it another one we have to pass to find out what is in it.

      Like

  3. Steve Dennis Says:

    It is a little surprising that this was sponsored by Paul Ryan, now that is disappointing!

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: