[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 55 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4250-S4251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           THE LINE-ITEM VETO

 Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, 2 weeks ago President Clinton 
signed the line item veto into law. I would just like to

[[Page S4251]]

explain briefly why I voted for this bill during the Senate's debate in 
March.
  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. So I am delighted that the Senate finally had a 
chance to vote on the conference report.


                  Line-Item Veto Sees the Light of Day

  I was especially pleased, Mr. President, because I had been in some 
suspense as to whether the line-item veto bill would emerge at all from 
the Senate's conference with the House. It was on March 23, 1995 that 
the Senate passed our line-item veto bill. The House took so long that 
I had to offer an amendment to urge the Speaker to agree to the 
Senate's invitation to a conference. When the House passed its bill, 
the budget debates slowed down the conference. There were weeks when I 
questioned whether we would be able to send the line-item veto to the 
President at all.
  Once the line-item veto did emerge from conference, a full year after 
the Senate passed its version, I could not help wondering whether the 
timing was an attempt by the majority to avoid giving President Clinton 
the line-item veto this year. The veto law will take effect only in 
January 1997, long after this Congress should complete its budget work. 
Since I voted to give Presidents Reagan and Bush the line-item veto, I 
regret that President Clinton will gain the line-item veto power only 
after this year's heavy legislative lifting is done.
  Having gotten my disappointment about the bill's timing off my chest, 
Mr. President, let me go on to discuss my views on the conference 
report.


                    Line-Item Veto a Sensible Reform

  Let there be no mistake about the line-item veto. It is a historic 
budget reform. It would enable the President to veto spending projects. 
That power is important because Congress has a bad habit of spending 
money on projects that we have not reviewed in committee hearings or 
permitted in authorization bills.
  The line-item veto law would also enable vetos of new entitlement 
spending and targeted tax benefits. This is crucial because 
entitlements are the fastest-growing portion of the Federal budget. 
Lastly, the bill also contains a provision requiring that savings 
achieved by the line-item veto be devoted solely to deficit reduction. 
Presidents will use the line-item veto only to save money.
  So, Mr. President, I am pleased that we have achieved this bipartisan 
budget reform. Fully 43 Governors have the line-item veto, which 
suggests to me that it is a power that the President can safely wield.
  The bill will help the President control spending abuses, especially 
unauthorized projects in appropriations bills. The line-item veto 
seemed to me to be a sensible reform. That is why I voted for it, and 
why I am pleased it is now the law of the land.

                          ____________________