Line Item Veto/Sequestering Funds

[Zkribbler]

We're heading into Budget Time again and USAians are wailing because the President doesn't have the Line Item Veto so (s)he can excise earmarks.

But didn't President Nixon handle this problem by simply directing his agencies not to do the work authorized by Congress? I don't remember any specifics but, say, if Congress had auhtorized a billion-dollar bridge to nowhere, the Army Corp of Engineers (or whoever) simply would have been directed by the President not to build it. (I believe at the time, this was called "sequestering funds.")

Presto, a functional Line-Item Veto.

[Deity Dude]

Aren't most earmarks monetary grants directly to the state or entity of the earmark.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Aren't most earmarks monetary grants directly to the state or entity of the earmark.

Tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat-tat!
And another great idea of mine is shot down.

[Lancer]

Bring back Dick, is that the idea Zkrib?

[Zkribbler]

Dick could have been a great President...if only he'd have listened to his own speeches.

[Lancer]

Telling people what they want to hear and doing whatever, typical politico.

[Jon Miller]

My understanding is that Bush has been doing plenty of 'ignore what I don't want to do that I sign into law'.

JM

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Dick could have been a great President...if only he'd have listened to his own speeches.

Lots of people could have been great Presidents if they listened to their own speeches...

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Deity Dude
Aren't most earmarks monetary grants directly to the state or entity of the earmark.

--Wait a minute! Even if it goes directly to the state or entity of the earmark, where does it come from? The Treasury Department. Those are the guys who write the check. So, the Prez simply orders Treasury not to write the check, and the money is sequestered.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, yes, that's the traditional non-line item veto way. People just get mad they aren't getting the funds that were promised them and the Prez usually plays along.

[DanS]

As I recall, the congress changed the law in response to Nixon's creative use of power such that there are consequences if the president doesn't spend the money as directed. The constitution gives the power of the purse to the congress, so at the end of the day, if push comes to shove, it will get its way.

There is an evolution to this, if you're interested.