The Republicans had a chance to get the line item veto, when the Democrats, who proposed the line item veto, had a majority in Congress and the president was a Democrat. The Republicans shot it down, because it would effectively cut them out of the political process at the time. Both know the stronger party would just cut out the weaker party. It’s an amendment that will eventually come back to haunt both parties so it’s never going to be reality.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Cut spending? That’s the job of Congress.

Theoretically. But in practice, because of the President’s veto power, it ends up depending on him as well. And if the President had the line item veto (as a couple of candidates propose) there would definitely be room for the President to cut spending all by himself.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Cut spending? That’s the job of Congress. Strengthen family values? Are they running for high priest? I agree that I saw little on their sites for actual presidential duties.

Here is basically what I found on their taken on infrastucture. They want to lower the taxes to strengthen the economy to bring in the taxes to pay for it. Here is the problem. The U.S. has experienced massive economic growth for nearly 25 years straight. If the money was easily there, there wouldn’t be this $800 billion (over five years) infrastructure deficit or even a national deficit. Some of them want across the board cuts (making the problem worse) except in defense spending. Those bridges won’t get blown up, just collapse from structural weakness.

http://wcco.com/politics/republican.rudy.guliani.2.373080.html

Amazing, this is question 32
http://www.youtube.com/republicandebate

During the last election, it was Al Sharpton with the clearest plan on trying to rebuild rather than repair our general infrastructure. You can see where many were stuck on just the internet (including Hillary Clinton), which I guess makes a great sewage system.
http://www.ontheissues.org/Infrastructure.htm

Like or Dislike: 0  0