Comments on: State of the Union Postmortem

By: Mythilt

Mythilt — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 23:25:56 +0000

I believe that what was found unconstitutional was the fact that the line-item veto that was created was for budgetary matters only, rather than all laws. And as such a new law enacted with a different set of parameters would not be automatically determined, and as such a different ruling might occur.

By: Rusty

Rusty — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 18:14:59 +0000

Wait, you mean you weren't watching South Park? But it was a classic episode!!

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 16:21:48 +0000

I can't speak to number 2, but I definitely see two rationales behind the first:
1. Oil is an extremely limited, non-renewable resource (unless you want to wait a loooong time). It's only a matter of time before we run out at all, it's just no one knows exactly when. Better find an alternative now than later.
2. Hope for the best, plan for the worst. :~)

By: ron

ron — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 15:06:37 +0000

I agree with Mr. Stotch's opinion. I listened to the speech in the background and when the president said "pass the line item veto", I nearly fell backwards. When the line item law was passed in the '90s, Robert Byrd and 5 other congressmen "defended the constitution" (or saved their pork) by taking their case to court as soon as they had standing. If I remember correctly, the law was declared unconstitutional because congress did not have the right to give up responsibilities given to them through the constitution. (Forgive me for not remembering the exact finding; it has been 5 years since I studied the case) The exact line in the speech was "And we can tackle this problem together, if you pass the line-item veto." (According to the Fox news website transcript) It was ambiguous as to whether it would be a law or amendment. Perhaps the speech writer knows that the American attention span is 10 min, not 10 years so it didn't matter that Mr. Bush mentioned the what, not the how.

By: Below The Beltway

Below The Beltway — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 07:26:43 +0000

The Real State Of The Union... Keeping with my previous promise, I did not watch last night's State of the Union address and, after reading through the transcript of the speech, I can only say that I'm glad that I didn't. Three-quarters of the speech is, as always, pure bunk; .....

By: Dodd

Dodd — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 06:50:48 +0000

There's nothing to stop Congress from passing a Constitutional Amendment allowing a line-item veto. In fact, it would be an essential part of any Balanced Budget Amendment - the need for which is even more clear now that we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that electing GOP majorities offers no protection whatsoever against profligate gov't spending.

By: Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator

Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator — Wed, 01 Feb 2006 05:51:16 +0000

Preview: State of the Union Address...

Renee Montagne talks to Senior Correspondent Juan Williams about some of the topics the president is...