The 'line item veto' is dangerous. Tommy Thompson had it is WI and

[rodeodance]

he was forever slashing, and changing the intent of the law passed by our assembly.

jr asked congress for this in his sotu last night

[bowens43]

1. Of course he wants it despite the fact

that the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1998

[annabanana]

3. ruh - roh

New Court - new rules

[Josh]

4. That's what I thought -

Clinton wanted it back then, too. It's dangerous on that level as well: it's all well and good to want it and get while you're in power, but what happens when the next guy decides to use it? What havoc will he wreak?

[Nordmadr]

2. So he could simply veto out anything he doesn't like. Why bother?

He doesn't follow the law anyway.

Olafr

[HereSince1628]

5. You can't be a decent dictator if you can't write law.

Which is why Bush wants the line item veto, and why it must be denied.

[zbdent]

6. Funny - they got it with Clinton - and the party who pushed so hard

for it in 1996 suddenly realized that it was unconstitutional . . . (mainly because they were hoping that Bob Dole would be wielding the white-out come 1/20/1997, instead of Clinton) . . .