Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Clinton did indeed abuse the Line Item Veto authority. The City of New York and Washington DC both sued claiming they suffered injury from President Clinton's cancellation of certain provisions of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 that eliminated certain liabilities, and Snake River Potato Growers, Inc. alleged injury from the President's cancellation of certain provisions of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 that gave tax benefits to aid farmer's cooperatives in purchasing potato processing facilities.
The Line Item Veto was meant to give the President authority over discretionary spending only. Clinton grossly abused that power using it on a wide variety of different legislation that had nothing to do with the discretionary spending or even the budget.
Instead of using the Line Item Veto responsibly, Clinton decided he would play the role of a petulant child and penalize Republicans by specifically targeting legislation in their districts for his Line Item Veto.
Clinton did want to spend more, a great deal more. Which is why he vetoed the FY96 budget on three separate occasions. He was particular miffed that Speaker Gingrich cut the growth of MediCare/MedicAid from 12.5% per year to 6.5% per year.
He didn't abuse the line-item veto power. He was sued because he shouldn't have had that power to begin with. But it was a REPUBLICAN promise to the nation to get that enacted. In order for the lawsuits to proceed through the courts, the people suing had to prove standing, that they had suffered a loss. It was not a matter of abuse, because the law gave Congress the power to override those line-items. If Clinton had abused the power, Congress would have overridden his line-item vetoes, and there would not have been anyone with any standing to sue.
When did Clinton ever work with Republicans? He vetoed almost every budget they submitted. He also vetoed numerous other laws enacted by Congress, including the Welfare Reform Act of 1996. The GOP controlled Congress later passed the Welfare Reform Act with a veto-proof majority, which finally shut Clinton up. Then, like the typical characterless slimeball that he is, he tries to take credit for the law he vehemently opposed.
Yeah, I remember that. He would take credit for something being passed which he opposed. He was such a phony!
Republicans should like both Clinton and Obama. Clinton did everything that Newt Gingrich told him to do, and Obama is, well....a lapdog of the GOP.
Gingrich did not tell Clinton to give (at our cost) North Korea nuclear materials (for "energy purposes") and build two nuclear plants (again, at our cost) which, of course, N. Korea instead uses to build nuclear weapons.
Gingrich also did not tell Clinton to change the way the CIA could obtain information. They could no longer obtain information from any informants who had a felony record. This severely hurt the intelligence being gathered and caused many long-time CIA agents to retire and eventually led to a less secure and safe country.
Gingrich did not tell Clinton to give (at our cost) North Korea nuclear materials (for "energy purposes") and build two nuclear plants (again, at our cost) which, of course, N. Korea instead uses to build nuclear weapons.
Gingrich also did not tell Clinton to change the way the CIA could obtain information. They could no longer obtain information from any informants who had a felony record. This severely hurt the intelligence being gathered and caused many long-time CIA agents to retire and eventually led to a less secure and safe country.
I can think of one thing I like better about Obama than Clinton - Carter. At least Obama is not using that bumbling moron to negotiate any more deals, like Clinton did.
It was Carter who gave away the store to North Korea while Clinton was President.
A) He was Brilliant politician who could say who say the right things at the right time and outmanoeuvre and defeat the republicans, and beat the at there own games day in day out.
B) The Economy Grew so much, and did not rise taxes - He defeated, beat them at their own game - proved that left of centre, the third way is the way forward,
C) Had sense of right and wrong, decency, a nice guy - but still won. and thats why the republicans hate him so much.
Yes, Obama is nothing compared to Clinton, I don't know who believes that. NAFTA is more than enough reason to come down 3x hard on Clinton than Obama.
Clinton was in the right place at the right time, Obama wasn't. Clinton got the love of minorities by always seeking them out and seeking their approval, Obama just by being black but many still don't care for him.
And for Reagan, seriously...? The guy was the devil in disguise... If you weren't rich and white you were basically screwed... he could care less.
Btw... he's a actor too but conservatives don't bring that up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
