If W Pulls this off....

[the-dude]

I'll be somewhat impressed:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/28/sotu.earmarks/index.html

I've always advocated this kind of thing, I think compromise on a bill should involve only essential elements of the bill itself, and some peripherals, but nothing completely unrelated to "buy" swing votes. Politicians voting records are frequently distorted because they vote against some of this pork or one unrelated element of a bill. Then you get something like "John Kerry doesnt want body armor for our troops", for example.

Washington lifers will say that few bills will get passed without it, but I say, fine by me. The truth is important legislation would still progress. We just need congress people to stop thinking they are entitled to pet projects. Its funny to hear them talk about "entitlement programs" for the disabled or unemployed, because to me the legislative process is itself the biggest entitlement program in the US.

I know the anti-bush knee jerk reaction folks are gonna say this sucks, and I'm probably more liberal than most of you, but I hate the process in Washington in large part due to these shady deals. IF (and thats a big if) he can get it done in a non partisan and meaningful manner, I will actually gain the slightest amount of respect for the man. Part of me thinks this is a strategy to align the republican party better to face Obama (seriously).

Tell me why I'm wrong here... I must be missing something.

[Docta]

a big problem with this is who defines which part of the appropriation is pork? do we need congress to have a separate bill for ever dollar spent? for every ten dollars?

bush is going to tell his agencies to not spend on the pork parts of bills, so his appointees will decide which parts get funded and which do not. it puts too much power in the hands of the ever expanding executive branch. it's the same argument against the line item veto or "signing statements" no matter which party the president belongs to.

[wombat18]

Which part of his anatomy is W going to pull off? :o

[the-dude]

a big problem with this is who defines which part of the appropriation is pork? do we need congress to have a separate bill for ever dollar spent? for every ten dollars?

bush is going to tell his agencies to not spend on the pork parts of bills, so his appointees will decide which parts get funded and which do not. it puts too much power in the hands of the ever expanding executive branch. it's the same argument against the line item veto or "signing statements" no matter which party the president belongs to.
No I see that. I just don't think there are too many 10 dollar appropriations out there. Also, 90% of the time on the senate and house floor is just posturing soundbite BS anyway. Why not make them actually vote on some shit and earn their money? You know, like a ballot? It really wouldn't be that hard. 600 million for Apache's, yes/no, 1.5 billion for next generation armored mine resistant APC yes/no, 250K for updated USO housing quarters in Afghanistan yes/no. Bridge to nowhere in Alaska yes/no. Every congress person's advisers could have their vote filled out in an hour easy. Especially given their party is going to give them their "advice" in advance anyway. How lazy are we? In essence, it gives every congressperson a line item veto. This does NOT preclude the kinds of deals that exist today, but they would be made via a promise instead of forcing it down everyones throats because they don't want to be on record voting against children or voting for AIDS, or against "The Troops", or whatever BS could be used against them in a future campaign.

Then when you hear Jon McCain spout something about being a responsible spender, you could look it up! Well John, you DID vote for 150 Mil extra spending for the McCain library in Phoenix, is that responsible spending? Instead of legislation being a confusing mess, I think it would simplify things greatly and help public understanding. I mean really, we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Unfortunately, after hearing the whole speech, this is not what bush is proposing, so we are fucked, yet again.

[Buzzstein]

Yeah the way we write and pass legislation in this country is pretty messed up. I hate how bills can be sabotaged by tacking bullshit to the end of it. There needs to be stricter rules.

[Duemellon]

Yeah the way we write and pass legislation in this country is pretty messed up. I hate how bills can be sabotaged by tacking bullshit to the end of it. There needs to be stricter rules.Well, before someone grabs this & runs with it:Some other way than Line-item veto rights for the President.b/c that was a scary proposition. There does need to be better regulation of keeping bills "on point" when they're being authored.

[BigSugar]

Why not a line-item veto that allows the president to kill any/all riders, but leave the basic legislation in place?

ie: either veto the whole thing, or line-item out the pork/riders and sign the underlying legislation without the extraneous crap. Don't let the president change the actual bill itself via line-item, but allow him/her to get rid of all the add-ons that are not part of the bill itself if the underlying legislation is otherwise something the prez wants to sign and make law.

[Duemellon]

Why not a line-item veto that allows the president to kill any/all riders, but leave the basic legislation in place?

ie: either veto the whole thing, or line-item out the pork/riders and sign the underlying legislation without the extraneous crap. Don't let the president change the actual bill itself via line-item, but allow him/her to get rid of all the add-ons that are not part of the bill itself if the underlying legislation is otherwise something the prez wants to sign and make law.because that puts a legislative action in the hands of a single person in the executive branch.

Granting line-item vetos to the prez is a band-aid. The source is the fact such bills can be laden down with those things. Fix that part & there's no need for granting the prez more power. The VP is pretty powerful in the legislative already.

Oh, and in the nature of giving our reading audience more of what than want than some civilized discussion over a disagreement: You're a rectal wart.

[drougan]

Why not a line-item veto that allows the president to kill any/all riders, but leave the basic legislation in place?

ie: either veto the whole thing, or line-item out the pork/riders and sign the underlying legislation without the extraneous crap. Don't let the president change the actual bill itself via line-item, but allow him/her to get rid of all the add-ons that are not part of the bill itself if the underlying legislation is otherwise something the prez wants to sign and make law.

If you're gonna do that, you might as well kill off the entire concept of pork since there's no reason for a president to sign off on a pet project.

Actually, the problem with riders in general is that they can torpedo legislation even without money involved. The resolution that attempted to give the District of Columbia (a swath of the country with more population than the entire state of Wyoming) voting representation in congress was sunk because the repubs insisted on attaching legislation undermining DC's local gun ban. Regardless of how you want to argue the merits of a gun ban, how are my best interests served when legislation that has a large impact on me is screwed over by legislation that has little?

[Measure Up!]

Why not have "pork week", where all the pork goes on one bill, it gets automatically vetoed by the president, and then goes back to congress for a marathon session in which each item is voted on individually, requiring 2/3rds to override.

[drougan]

Why not have "pork week", where all the pork goes on one bill, it gets automatically vetoed by the president, and then goes back to congress for a marathon session in which each item is voted on individually, requiring 2/3rds to override.


"Pork Week" does have the media branding identity to quite suit the rediculous circus that news/politics has become. :D

[BigSugar]

Oh, and in the nature of giving our reading audience more of what than want than some civilized discussion over a disagreement: You're a rectal wart.

yeah, yeah.....and you're a racist pig. Love you too! :)

[BigSugar]

Why not have "pork week",...

i think Wee Willy Clinton celebrates that every year on the anniversary of diddling Monica....<rimjob!....errrr.....shot!>