It actually wasn’t a line-item veto but rather an amendment offered by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-NH, providing a line-item recission authority in which the president would ask Congress to vote on specific provisions of spending bills such as earmarks. But Senate Democrats led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, and Sen. Robert “King of Pork” Byrd, D-WV, defeated the Gregg amendment today. The vote was on a cloture motion to end debate on the amendment and bring it to a final vote. A three-fifths majority, or 60 votes, were required to end the debate. The motion failed on a 49-48 vote, with three senators not voting. Among those Democrats voting against the Gregg Amendment today were Byrd, Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-CA, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-WS, Sen. Joe Biden, D-DE, Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-ND, and Sen. Carl Levin, D-MI. Here’s what these same Democrats said about a genuine line-item veto proposal authored back in 1995 by then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle: Sen. Byrd, 3/21/1995 The Daschle substitute does not result in any shift of power from the legislative branch to the executive. It is clear cut. It gives the President the opportunity to get a vote. So I am 100 percent behind the substitute by Mr. Daschle. Sen. Byrd, 3/22/1995 I have no problem with giving the President another opportunity to select from appropriation bills certain items which he feels, for his reasons, whatever they may be, they may be political or for whatever reasons, I have no problem with his sending them to the two Houses and our giving him a vote. Sen. Feinstein, 3/21/1995 What a line-item veto is all about is deterrence, and that deterrence is aimed at the pork barrel. I sincerely believe that a line-item veto will work.” Sen. Dorgan, 4/25/1996 I have long believed that giving the President line-item veto authority will be helpful in imposing budget discipline. I think it will be helpful in preventing unsupportable spending projects from being added to spending bills without public notice, debate, or hearings. I have voted for the line-item veto three times in the past three Congresses. Sen. Biden, 3/27/96 Mr. President, I have long supported an experiment with a line-item veto power for the president. Sen. Levin, 3/27/96 That so-called expedited rescission process it seems to me, is constitutional and is something which we can, in good conscience, at least I, in good conscience, support, Sen. Feingold, 3/22/95 The line-item veto is about getting rid of those items after the president has them on his desk. I think this will prove to be a useful tool in eliminating some of things that have happened in Congress that have been held up to public ridicule. Sen. Dodd, 3/23/96 I support the substitute offered by Senator Daschle. I believe it is a reasonable line-item veto alternative. It requires both Houses of Congress to vote on a President s rescission list and sets up a fast-track procedure to ensure that a vote occurs in a prompt and timely manner.
