Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site psuvax1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ukma!psuvm.bitnet!psuvax1!berman
From: berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Line Item Veto at Presidential Level
Message-ID: <2006@psuvax1.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Feb-86 15:31:14 EST
Article-I.D.: psuvax1.2006
Posted: Thu Feb 27 15:31:14 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Feb-86 20:59:47 EST
References: <155@jc3b21.UUCP> <1405@mhuxt.UUCP>
Organization: Pennsylvania State Univ.
Lines: 31

>       Agreed.  One would hope that a line item veto would spell the end to
> tobacco and milk price supports, and many other 'pet' cash flows various
> factions support.
>
> > Emery Mandel
> --
> Jeff Sonntag

One could hope that Reagan would do something agains god old Jessie Helms,
but I am not the one.  One could hope that Reagan would do something
against duplicating, inefficient and expensive defence systems, but
again I am not the one.  Milk price support has so bipartisan support
that I would caution you against any optimism.

The real issue is that the President (whoever he is) will be able to
blackmail each faction by keeping its project a hostage (like auto
and steel quotas for the steel-belt, water projects for the West,
sugar quotas for Louisiana etc. etc.) and force his pets through.
By similar means he could diminish support to some programs which
do not cost very much, but are opposed for purely ideological reasons
(like LSC).  Similarly, President could use the increased power to
push through controversial appointments, and this is the area where
his power is already to large (witness his board of LSC which is at
war with the goals of Legal Services approved by Congress).

I repeat, we are talking here not about some efficiencies, but
about naked power.  I agree that one-line veto would not make
President a dictator, but it would be a large step in this direction.

Piotr Berman