President Bush is threatening to use his power to veto government spending because he does not want to go back to the “days of the tax-and spend policies” era. Regarding Homeland Security, the House of Representatives okayed more than what was budgeted, but Bush was not willing to sign. The Democrats increased the funding for the war in Iraq, which was above the proposed budget. Many pet projects were included in the spending bills in which the President has asked his administration to disclose them by posting them on a website. Even Republicans are joining forces to get enough votes to overrule the President’s veto.
I believe that the President has the authority and power to veto any measures that he sees fit to do so because he is the president. Especially if these measures are over budget and sometimes unnecessary. I found this interesting because it showed how the President and those in office were at odds and had different opinions regarding many important issues and topics.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/16/bush.radio.ap/index.html
I believe that the President has the authority and power to veto any measures that he sees fit to do so because he is the president. Especially if these measures are over budget and sometimes unnecessary. I found this interesting because it showed how the President and those in office were at odds and had different opinions regarding many important issues and topics.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/16/bush.radio.ap/index.html
4 comments:
Your article does show the vetoing power of the executive branch. If we never spent so much money going into this war then we wouldn't be spending EVEN more money on the poor soldiers that need urget medical attention. WAY TO GO BUSH
I believe that it does make sense that if the president IS the president, then he should have the authority to veto anything he thinks should be vetoed. It is also true that if we didn't spend that much money going into war, then we wouldn't have to spend more to get ourselves out.
Executive authority should be recognized as long as it hadn't been abused in the past. I believe that while he does have this power of veto, it is a shame that Congress has not yet gotten a 2/3 majority to cancel this veto. If Bush did not make such the hype he did when the war began, creating the Patriot Act which violates many individual rights, I might have sided with him. However, to promote a war, then enter it and not want to pay realizing the mistake of it all is very irresponsible on Bush's part.
I have to agree with desire yams, the president should have the right to veto anything he believes in. I mean he has to think about what is best for the nation not just because he is being selfish. We shouldn't have spent so much money on the war period. We should have kept a limit on how much money we could have spent on the war.
Post a Comment