Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

McCain, Senators tell Bush it's OK to ignore Congress (doesn't need LIV?)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 03:52 PM
Original message
McCain, Senators tell Bush it's OK to ignore Congress (doesn't need LIV?)
Edited on Tue Mar-21-06 04:00 PM by ProSense
Giving Bush authority to use his judgement and bypass Congress?

SENATORS SEND BIPARTISAN LETTER URGING THE PRESIDENT TO


Report Says 95% Of Earmarks For Fy06 Are Not Legally Binding
For Immediate Release
Thursday, Mar 09, 2006

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), and Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) sent a letter to President George W. Bush, urging him to utilize his authority to stop wasteful earmarks written into committee reports and managers statements, but not in the text of legislation. A Congressional Research Service (CRS) report released this week concluded that over 95% of the Fiscal Year 2006 earmarks are not legally binding.

“The President was right in saying that earmarks need to be reduced, but now he needs to take an important step to make that happen,” Senator DeMint said. “If the President would tell his cabinet to ignore the thousands of earmarks that were not written into law, he could instantly solve most of the problem and make it much more difficult for Congress to micromanage our government with special interest projects.”

“The President talks a lot about wasteful spending in Washington, but he already has the power to do something about it,” Senator Bayh said. “Pork barrel spending is a threat to our economy, our security and our independence – it’s time the President used his authority to start cutting pork out of our budget. At the same time, I will continue working with my colleagues in the Senate to eliminate wasteful spending before it reaches the President’s desk.”

“The president does not need to wait on Congress to exercise line-item veto power,” said Dr. Coburn. “Under the law, wasteful earmarks that are only listed in conference reports can, and should, be ignored by executive branch agencies. If the president takes this stance, Congress will back down because they will be making an argument they will never win with the public. No rational voter will tolerate Congress holding up appropriations for vital services or national defense priorities so politicians can secure their earmarks and pet projects. I hope the president does not hesitate to use this power that is already at his disposal.”

“The President’s veto of earmarks in reports accompanying legislation would help put an end to one of the most disgraceful practices in Congress today,” said Senator McCain. “These earmarks do not have the force of law, but their sponsors have the power of the purse string – which, to my great dismay, seems to be just as strong. I applaud the President’s desire to help impose discipline on the Federal budget, and I trust that he will see fit to put the interests of the American taxpayer first by vetoing these harmful earmarks.”

”Right now we have a golden opportunity to tackle the earmarking problem which has overtaken the appropriations process,” said Senator Feingold. “The President should join us in this effort to restore sanity to the appropriations process and show the American people that we can and will be careful stewards of American taxpayer dollars.”

The letter reads in part:

If your Administration would reject even some of the most wasteful earmarks, it would ensure that scarce federal funds are spent on national priorities and it would make it substantially more difficult for Congress to load up annual spending bills with earmarks.

Unfortunately, too many of your agency heads believe they will face retaliation from Congress if they competitively award projects and do not follow committee report instructions. If these agencies are going to have the where-with-all to stand up and do what is right for taxpayers, and their agency’s missions, they need to know they speak for the President.

“House and Senate Appropriators have acknowledged the need for flexibility in how American tax dollars are spent,” concluded DeMint. “Now it’s time for the President to accept their offer and give his Administration the full flexibility to spend their budgets in an open, competitive way without fear of retaliation from Congress.”


http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=1674



I know what earmarks are, and they can be handle with a line-item veto that keeps Congress in the equation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 04:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well, is McCain right? Earmarks are just suggestions?
No force of law, just the force of not wanting a huge huge fight with Congress, and McCain is saying, have the fight, the President will win?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Fight it.
I can see Bush keeping all the Republican pork.

Approve the line-item veto and let him go through the process of stripping items from the bill and then sending it back to Congress for a vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Republican Congress is in deep shit, and it keeps getting deeper.
"The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper."

** Commander Bunnypants

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. I don't understand how this can be legal if the Clinton
line item veto wasn't because all you could do was over ride the President's veto. It seems this is the same stuff the LIV removed, if it were legal to do it this way, wouldn't Clinton (a brilliant lawyer married to another brilliant lawyer) have done this. If the reaon then was that Congress has the final word - this is far worse, Congress can't even over ride it. So, you can pass something 10 times with 100 Senators and all the Congressmen and theoretically a President could refuse to do it.

The other thing is that it means the budget numbers would always be unreal as they would include all these expenses that won't happen. Why did any Democrats sign this???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadMaddie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 04:50 PM
Response to Original message
5. I find it interesting but Congress has a job to do...
It is Congresses job to micromanage what the President does...is McCain trying to set it up for when he runs and if he (not) wins that he will have this power?


<snip>
he could instantly solve most of the problem and make it much more difficult for Congress to micromanage our government with special interest projects.”
<snip>

Any respect I had for McCain is gone.....he is the worst of the bunch...he has shown his true colors!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-21-06 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. Interesting article from 2003.
GOP axes Dems’ earmarks
Regula to punish opponents of Labor-HHS bill
By Hans Nichols

The House Republican leadership has endorsed an effort by Rep. Ralph Regula (R-Ohio), an appropriations cardinal, to punish Democrats en masse for their blanket opposition to the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education spending package.

Regula’s plan to redirect all potential Democratic earmarks to vulnerable Republicans would breathe new life into a principle that Republican leaders have long wanted their more accommodating appropriators to enforce: If Democrats vote against appropriations bills, they shouldn’t expect special projects earmarked for their districts.

Snip...

The $470 billion bill, currently before a House-Senate conference, has roughly $1 billion set aside for special earmarked projects in lawmakers’ districts, said Jim Dyer, staff director of the House Appropriations Committee.

Hastert’s words of encouragement were delivered at the Republican conference, said a GOP leadership aide. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) also is supportive of the strategy, said his spokesman, Stuart Roy.

more...

http://www.thehill.com/news/102203/earmarks.aspx



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC