Cord Byrd: “I hope to speak at some length about the line-item veto at a later time. However, for the benefit of my colleagues, I…”

“I hope to speak at some length about the line-item veto at a later time. However, for the benefit of my colleagues, I want to respond to the arguments put forward today about two measures I endorsed in 1995 and 1996. The Daschle amendment that I cosponsored in 1995, and the amendment I offered to the motion to recommit the line-item veto conference report in 1996, are vastly different in regard to their Constitutional ramifications from what has been offered by Senator Gregg to the ethics reform bill. The Gregg proposal allows the President to submit rescission proposals up to 365 days after he signs a bill into law. Such latitude would allow the President to unilaterally veto a one-year appropriation by delaying its expenditure, and then submitting it for rescission within 45 days of its expiration. In contrast, the proposals I endorsed in 1995 and 1996 would have limited a President to submitting rescission proposals within 20 days of a bill being signed into law. The proposals I have endorsed would have prevented the President from unilaterally cancelling a one-year appropriations. The Gregg amendment contains no such protection. The Gregg proposal also prohibits amendments to the President's rescission requests. In contrast, the proposals I have endorsed would have allowed motions to strike.”