Line-item veto would help slash wasteful spending
In Wisconsin, congressional leaders have a long tradition of putting partisanship aside to solve problems. In recent years, I’ve upheld this tradition by teaming with Janesville native and former Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold to advance legislation providing the president with a line-item veto to cut wasteful spending from the federal government’s bloated budget.
It’s a straightforward concept that has received bipartisan support, and I was encouraged to introduce it again earlier this week with Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the ranking Democratic member on the House Budget Committee.
The fiscal and economic challenges facing our nation are immense. Our national debt recently surpassed $15 trillion. Massive spending increases—fueled by three years of deficits exceeding $1 trillion—have failed to reduce unemployment or create jobs. In addition to the alarming budget deficit and the painful jobs deficit, Washington’s failure to tackle these challenges has created a growing credibility deficit.
For years, policymakers from both political parties have failed to serve as responsible stewards of American families’ hard-earned tax dollars. Both parties have been part of the problem, and both will need to be part of the solution if we are going to give future generations a chance at prosperity. Leaders must deliver immediate and long-term solutions that create jobs and grow the economy, and those of us who serve in Congress must welcome any opportunity to advance common-sense solutions that get federal spending under control.
This effort, which I began with Sen. Feingold and am now continuing with Rep. Van Hollen, makes clear leaders can work together to address the problems that are adding to our debt.
The Expedited Line-Item Veto and Rescissions Act of 2011 is a simple, effective way to eliminate unnecessary spending items. This legislation gives the president a precise tool to go after wasteful spending, while also protecting Congress’ constitutional authority to make spending decisions. It would allow the president to identify specific spending items in a bill that he believes should be cut and require Congress to take an up-or-down vote on them. If Congress fails to overturn the president’s veto, all of the proposed spending would be put toward reducing our deficit.
This legislation requires the federal government to be accountable for what it spends, adding much-needed oversight and transparency to the budget process. The line-item veto builds on other deficit-reduction efforts passed by the House of Representatives this year, such as a permanent ban on earmarks and real caps on spending. Taken together, these steps are changing the culture of wasteful spending that has dominated Washington for far too long.
The Expedited Line Item Veto and Rescissions Act is just one step toward restraining spending over the long term, but it’s a critical one. I’m grateful for Rep. Van Hollen’s willingness to advance it. The bill makes clear that there’s no shortage of bipartisan reforms Congress can approve to show a renewed commitment to getting our economy growing while bringing fiscal responsibility back to Washington.
U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Janesville, serves Wisconsin’s 1st District. Contact him through his Janesville Constituent Services Center, 20 S. Main St., Suite 10, Janesville, WI 53545; his Washington, D.C., phone is (202) 225-3031.


Dec 24, 2011 at 1:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
How about we pass the line item veto with a 2 year clause that it will need to be repassed or left out, depending on how it works. Funny part is, it was a bipartisan measure between Ryan and Feingold. Lets not make this harder then it really is people.
Dec 3, 2011 at 7:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Jvl?..my point is the pres (no matter the party) would veto his/her parts of the bill he/she doesn't like but let pass his/her party's pet projects. Example: Obama would let "green" pet projects go thru but would veto small business projects that GOP wanted. Too partisan.
Dec 2, 2011 at 3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fool, I disagree with you. This does not give any president the ability to draft legislation, but does give him power to veto add ons to the original bill. No more spending money for projects other than outlined in the original bill - no 10 million for some community college program to study the number of times fireflies blink - tacked on to a federal highway bill to rebuild crumbling bridges ( this is a fictitious example, but strange things like this have been attached to bills)
The Senate and House would then have to quickly vote overturn the presidents veto. (and we are all watching) Why veto the whole good bill because of a hidden bad apple?
Dec 1, 2011 at 3:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
I disagree with Paul Ryan on this issue. The Office of the President has been inching beyond its constitutionally limited authority for many years, especially since the events of 9/11.
The role of the legislature is to draft legislation. The role of the president is to either veto or sign it into law. A line item veto would grant a president defacto authority to draft legislation, which is not afforded to the executive branch by our Constitution. Only Congress is granted that authority. The Framers structured it this way with good reason.
Instead of line item veto, we need a president with enough cojones to veto bad legislation along with a clear explanation of his reasons for doing so. A few embarrassing rounds like that and maybe Congress will stop trying to draft legal tomes packed with loopholes and favors craftily written by K Street lawyers.
Dec 1, 2011 at 11:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
What donnaw says below is exactly the heart of the problem -- the disfunctional two-party system. Everything should not be decided based on that! The healthy constitutional model is for the dynamic to focus on the balance between the three branches of Government and between the State and Federal governments, not dictated by the puppetmasters of two political parties.
-
I believe Paul Ryan would support the line-item veto regardless of the party associated with the administrative branch at any particular time.
Dec 1, 2011 at 8:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
And with line item veto I can just see the items vetoed and the items that are let thru, depending on which party is in the White House.
Dec 1, 2011 at 3:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Congressman eliminated base-line budgeting and removing automated increases to budget items is also needed. This game of tiny fixes need to end as real reform is LONG overdue; they never achieve desired goals because other spending eclipses any gains . The time for claims of wanting to fix it are long past. It is high time those in your position start to fix the very problems you often talk of.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.