[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 114 (Thursday, August 5, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10494-S10495]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. ALLARD:
  S.J. Res. 31. A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States granting the President the authority 
to exercise an item veto of individual appropriations in an 
appropriations bill; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


              the line-item veto constitutional amendment

 Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, the federal budget is prominent 
right now as we discuss the spending policies that will guide Congress 
through the coming fiscal years. In the midst of these discussions, I 
would like to bring up an important issue that many members have 
supported in the past. I am here today to introduce a line-item veto 
constitutional amendment.
  Prior to my election to the Senate I served in the House of 
Representatives. In that body I introduced a constitutional line-item 
veto on several occasions. This was motivated by my view that the 
greatest threat to our economy was deficit spending which is still 
adding to the accumulated $5.6 trillion national debt. As a Member of 
the Senate, I introduced this legislation again in 1997. This occurred 
just after a Federal district court declared the enacted statutory 
line-item veto, or more accurately, enhanced rescission authority, to 
be unconstitutional.
  In 1996, Congress gave the President what is generally referred to as 
expanded rescission authority when it passed the Line Item Veto Act. 
All Presidents, beginning with George Washington, had impoundment 
authority similar to what the Line Item Veto Act intended until 
Congress limited rescission authority in 1974 under the Impoundment 
Control Act.
  Ultimately the Supreme Court upheld the district court ruling in 
Clinton v. City of New York, where the Line Item Veto Act was ruled 
unconstitutional on grounds that it violates the presentment clause. 
Now a presidential line-item veto can only be provided by amending the 
Constitution, and that is what I seek to do with this legislation.
  Governors in 43 states have some type of line item veto. This is 
consistent with the approach taken in most state constitutions of 
providing a greater level of detail concerning the budget process than 
is contained in the U.S. Constitution. In my view, the line item veto 
has been an important factor in the more responsible budgeting that 
occurs at the state level.
  Colorado gives line item veto authority to the governor, and that 
power, along with a balanced budget requirement in the state 
constitution, has worked well and insured that Colorado has been 
governed in a fiscally responsible manner regardless of who served in 
the legislature or in the governor's office.
  I believe it is time that we take the approach of the states. In 
order to do this we must enact a Constitutional Amendment. Under 
article I, section 7 of the Constitution, the President's veto 
authority has been interpreted to mean that he must sign or veto an 
entire piece of legislation.
  The Constitution reads: ``Every Bill which shall have passed the 
House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a 
Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve 
he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to 
that House in which it shall have originated, *  *  *'' this section 
then proceeds to outline the procedures by which Congress may override 
this veto with a two-thirds vote of both houses.
  The amendment that I am introducing today amends this language as it 
pertains to appropriations bills. It specifically provides that the 
President shall have the power to disapprove any appropriation of an 
appropriations bill at the time the President approves the bill.
  This change will make explicit that the President is no longer 
confined to

[[Page S10495]]

either vetoing or signing an entire bill, but that he may choose to 
single out certain appropriations for veto and still sign a portion of 
the bill.
  A constitutional amendment ensuring that the President has line-item 
veto authority over congressional spending bills is an important tool 
in our continuing efforts to restore fiscal responsibility to the 
Federal government.
  Mr. President, I look forward to further discussion on this important 
issue. We must seriously consider a constitutional amendment to allow 
the line item veto, and I hope that my colleagues will support this 
amendment or similar language in the Senate.

                          ____________________