- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Distraught US online gamblers hoping for a reversal of the proposed US law disrupting online gambling financial channels were discussing protests directed at political representatives and an unusual and uncertain avenue called the President’s Line Item Veto today.
Full Story Here: http://www.real-casinos.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2615
He could veto the bill, that might even be a smart political move considering the number of gamblers they are pissing off, but I dont expect it; and if he did I would still vote democrat!
In the movies, like… the “Last Action Hero…” Arnie would come in and save the day.. right as the pen was about to touch the paper.
Kallliiiiiii-forina!
Jokes I aside I do hope common sense prevails here.
There is little to no chance that Bush will veto this, it was a calculated political move to force the democrats to help push through a republican sponsored terror bill 5 weeks before an election so that the GOP could show their hard line voting constitiuents that they could control things so hard liners go get out & vote or it was to show those same hard line voters that the democrats were obstructionists of a terror bill 5 weeks before an election. Bill will be signed for sure, I’d bet on it but being that I am in the US, I’m not sure I can.
The Line item veto has been prohibited since back in the 1990’s (I think there is a law governing this). That is why Frist & Company attached the Gambling Bill to the Ports Bill, which will definitely be signed by Bush-League. There is no way that Congress or Bush would fail to pass and sign the Ports Bill. Dirty politics, yes; within legal bounds, yes.
Even if Line Item Veto potential existed, there is no way that Bush would go against his GOP brethren.
There is no line item veto. That’s why our Congress is so corrupt. The members alway add their favorite “pork barrel” to bills – good example is the highway in Alaska that leads nowhere!
Believe it was Clinton that did away with line item veto.. but Bush can choose to say.. I will not sign this until such and such language is removed (reforendum) however even that is pretty dang unlikely.
~LadyH
In 2006, members of the United States Congress raised concerns regarding President George W. Bush’s use of signing statements, to indicate that he would not enforce provisions of laws that he signed. This has been viewed as effectively a line-item veto by the president, raising constitutional issues regarding the practice.[4]
In his 2006 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush requested that Congress give him the line item veto authority.
On June 22, 2006, the United States House of Representatives passed a bill (H.R. 4890) that would call for a six-year line-item veto to cut down on the “pork barrel spending” associated with Congressional lawmaking. The bill stopped short of granting a full line-item veto like the one passed in the 1990s, and instead allows the President to send a bill back to Congress within 45 days for another vote to affirm rider bills. The bill passed 247-172 in the Republican-controlled House. The bill has yet to be considered in the Senate.[5]
Supporters of the presidential line-item veto power contend that it would serve to cut down on frivolous government spending, and that media scrutiny would protect against abuse. Opponents argue that it would violate the separation of powers. See Clinton v. City of New York for additional material on current events.
As I said before NO chance that Bush will veto this because of the addition of the Gambling provisions. Right now Bush & the GOP need all of the moral authority they can muster with this Florida senator (Foley) case eroding their moral image.
