Ruled unconstitutional in 1997, after President Clinton used it some 82 times, the Line Item Veto is back, but this time with the weight of a Constitutional Amendment. Senator George Allen, who deems himself a legitimate contender for the 2008 Presidential election; and Senator Talent, facing a tough re-election campaign next year, offered the Amendment today.
Claire McCaskill, Talent`s challenger, was having none of this Johnny come lately budget consciousness, and fired out a statement, "Unfortunately for the working families in Missouri getting hit with $3-a-gallon gas prices, a line item veto cannot bring back the $14 billion in tax giveaways to companies like Exxon, Shell, and Amoco that Jim Talent helped push through Congress."
If Talent & Allen are serious about the Line Item Veto, it could be another contentious debate within the Democratic Party, as it was in 1996. 43 states now have a Line Item Veto and many Democrats now in Congress supported the Veto in 1996. But with the endless line of disasters from the Bush Administration, those same Democrats could also decide they cannot trust this President with any more authority than they've already given him. And while the public was very supportive of the Line Item Veto in the hands of Bill Clinton, the continued no-bid contracts for Katrina in spite of the loss of billions of dollars in the Iraq War is likely to leave the American public leery of entrusting George Bush with another penny of taxpayer money.
As Republicans continue to under-estimate the damage the Bush Administration's policies have done to the American people, what looks to be little more than a pre-election PR stunt is bound to backfire. Just why would a Republican controlled Congress need a line item veto for a Republican President anyway? Seems to me it's tantamount to admitting that it's always been Republicans who have been unable to rein in their spending.
LINKS
http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/?view=plink&id=1390