A Good Use of the Line-Item Veto
Combest has a rundown of stories about Gov. Jay Nixon’s budget cuts. I think this is a excellent use of the line-item veto, and a good example of why the line-item veto is needed at the federal level. I’ll leave the full details of the cuts to the linked news articles, but, in short, Nixon used the line-item veto to cut $105 million and delay $325 million in spending. He will also be eliminating about 200 government jobs, on top of the 1,200 jobs cut in the original budget passed by the legislature.
I say, good for the governor. This is exactly the type of use for which I think the line-item veto was intended. As I understand it, the General Assembly will now vote on veto overrides for those cuts, but thanks to the line-item veto, the entire budget goes forward. (I am wearing my practical hat right now.) Hopefully, none of the cuts will be overridden — but, if they are, that just shows how the line-item veto can work within the Constitution.
I deeply hope the president gets the line-item veto some day. I don’t share concerns about too much executive power in this case, because the Congress could still override any individual veto. But I am pretty sure I will have some disagreement among the commenters.


I’d rather see an executive with the cojones to veto most bills wholesale, as a matter of course. But we’re not going to get that guy, so I like the line-item veto. Definitely.
Comment by Eric D. Dixon — June 26, 2009 @ 4:30 p.m.
I support the line item veto and am encouraged by the continued support that
Feingold and Mccain have given the issue. The White House as well.
Comment by Abhi Sivasailam — June 26, 2009 @ 4:50 p.m.
Good for them, I suppose, but you’ll have to excuse me if I shudder when I hear their names mentioned in the same breath…
Comment by Eric D. Dixon — June 26, 2009 @ 11:34 p.m.