Mr. President, on April 9, 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Line Item Veto Act. This act was the product of years of legislative consideration and much protracted debate. Beginning January 1 of this year and through the year 2004, the Line Item Veto Act provides the President with the authority, under a set of carefully circumscribed limitations, to cancel particular items of appropriation, direct spending or limited tax benefit in any bill. The President must report any such cancellation to Congress by special message within 5 days after his approval of the bill containing such spending or tax provisions. Congress then has the opportunity to decide whether to pass a law disapproving the President's cancellation and mandating the spending or tax benefit. As I have stated, this Act was passed after much consideration and debate understanding the potential Constitutional implications. In the end, Congress determined to empower the President in this manner in recognition of the fact that strong tools are necessary if we are to achieve our goal of finally getting the Federal budget in balance.
Trent Lott: “Mr. President, on April 9, 1996, President Clinton signed into law the Line Item Veto Act. This act was the product of…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the Line Item Veto Act and its implications during Senate proceedings.
Share
More from Trent Lott
You've got to do that every now and then. Even though you might get your little flak from some of the people within your conference. It's called leadership.
let me say again to the Senator from South Carolina who just left the Chamber, I appreciate the way he has approached this. He did not come in and condemn it; he looked at it. He had some ideas, and several of them have been accepted. I…
I again say to Senator Lautenberg, I have enjoyed working with him on transportation issues--from aviation to highways to highway safety and certainly the rail area and most particularly with regard to Amtrak and the national rail…
I was always a conservative Republican and I had very strong beliefs about certain things we should or should not do. But also thought that I was sent to Washington by the people of my state not to make a statement but to make a difference…