Just because an apple has a bruise doesn't mean the entire apple is bad. Just cut out the bruise and the rest of the apple is fine.
That's one way to look at the line item veto. Just because the federal budget may contain some unnecessary and wasteful spending items doesn't mean the entire budget is bad. Wouldn't it be great if the President were able to cut out the wasteful spending without vetoing the entire budget as we do in Nebraska?
The Nebraska Way
In Nebraska, the Governor is able to veto individual spending sections without vetoing the entire budget. In Washington, the President has to take the whole budget, excessive spending and all, or he has to veto the entire budget, including the acceptable and necessary parts.
We need to change the way it's done in Washington which is why I am sponsoring the BELT Act of 2009. BELT stands for Budget Enforcement Legislative Tool. This would give the President limited rescission authority, line item veto if you will, to propose reductions and eliminations in appropriations bills passed by Congress, which would then get an up-or-down vote for approval or override.
As one of only a handful of senators who are former governors and have first-hand experience using the line-item veto, I know its value. As governor, I used it often to reign in excessive spending proposed by the state legislature. Sometimes just the fact I had the line-item veto curbed spending when bills were first drafted. And the system worked.
Eight Balanced Budgets
Upon finishing my two terms, I had balanced the state's budget eight times and left office with a General Fund balance of almost $300 million and a cash reserve of $145 million. I used the line-item veto in a careful and responsible manner to help Nebraska achieve a balanced budget and lower taxes.
Presidents from both parties have repeatedly asked Congress to grant them line item veto powers and in 1996 it did; however, the provision was later struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court as granting too much power to the Executive branch.
We tried again in 2006 but the effort fell short. It's time to go at it again, this time with a limited version in order to assure Constitutional muster. This year's legislation would allow the President to identify reductions and eliminations in each spending bill - called rescissions - and package them up into legislation that would be sent back to Congress.
The rescission package would be put on a fast track with Congress for an up-or-down vote, but no opportunity for amendments. There would be no vetoing of entitlement programs or tax benefits and the President would not be allowed to reduce an authorized program's budget by more than 25 percent, however, unauthorized programs could be vetoed out.
Sunset Clause
The rescission authority would expire after four years in order to allow Congress to determine if it's working.
The time has come to tighten the BELT and put the brakes on runaway government spending, and this bill will help to accomplish that with a commonsense proposal that will bring more accountability to the way Washington spends your tax dollars.