Dems Opposed to Modest Veto Plan

(AP) The Senate is moving toward its first vote in more than a decade on the line-item veto, and it's remarkable how much has changed _ particularly the positions of many of the major players.

At issue is a watered-down GOP measure that would allow a president to scrutinize spending bills he signs into law for questionable items and then submit cuts, or rescissions, to Congress for a vote. Unlike the current system, Congress couldn't simply ignore the cuts _ if both Houses voted to approve them, they'd go into effect.

Put forward by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., it's far weaker than the line-item veto power a GOP-dominated Congress gave President Clinton in 1996. Under that bill, before it was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1998, Clinton's line-item vetoes automatically went into effect unless overturned by a two-thirds vote of both House and Senate.

Still, debate on Gregg's plan already has whipped up passions. Most adamant in opposition is Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., who assaulted the idea last week and again Monday as an attack on Congress' control over the federal purse strings.

"Make no mistake, this line-item veto authority would grant tremendous _ and dangerous _ new power to the president," Byrd said. "He would have unchecked authority to imperil congressional power over the purse, a power that the constitutional framers felt was absolutely vital to reining in an overzealous president."