Michaelthe Course Text Addresses Replies To Each
ORIGINAL QUESTION:
How
do the president’s personal budgetary styles and roles affect federal
budgeting? Give at least two examples using the book or other sources.
Use different examples than your classmates.
What
is your opinion of the line item veto in appropriations bills? Ensure
you back up your opinion with an example as to why you think the way you
do
STUDENT 1 POST:
The course text addresses two instances of presidential influence of federal budgeting.Under the Reagan administration, tax cuts were made, but defense spending was expanded.This was in line with the Reagan administration’s objectives.This demonstrates how presidential objectives can be obtained through the proposal.In the proposal, the president is able to establish priorities.This gives Congress an idea of what will be able to pass.The tax cuts and defense increases under President Reagan were reflective of presidential initiatives, even though they left the country with an increased deficit.
President Clinton vetoed a bill which would have cut taxes and social programs submitted by a republican dominated Congress.This veto resulted in a conflict between Congress and the president which ended in multiple partial government shut-downs.Congress took the blame and the president gained political capital.This put the democrats in position to take budgetary actions which resulted in a balanced budget.These circumstances, combined with a lack of war, and a cooperative economy benefited President Clinton, even though Congress was the driving factor behind the budgeting moves.Although the president essentially submits a “wish list” to Congress, Congress is aware that some of this will have to be approved for the budget to pass without veto.
My opinion of the line item veto, matches that of the 1998 supreme court.I think it is ridiculous.The executive office already has more reach than the constitution intended, as highlighted in the course text, explaining the evolution of the budgeting process.Allowing him to pick and choose specific items he doesn’t like is absurd.Items get approved as part of bipartisan agreements in the budgeting process.The president could just veto any items provided by the opposite party, resulting in a budget which is not representative of the people, but instead only half.The Supreme Court found it in violation of the Presentment Clause as identified by the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law (Line, n.d).The Supreme Court determined that this was a legislative and not executive function.The Line Item Veto. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/art…
STUDENT 2: Sully
Q) How do the president’s personal
budgetary styles and roles affect federal budgeting? Give at least two
examples using the book or other sources. Use different examples than
your classmates.
A) Right off the bat we see the power of the executive position. The
President has first play in negotiations, the ability to submit “the
President’s budget”, and the power to veto and negotiate with congress.
Many presidents have tried to utilize the federal budget to press their
own agendas for better or worse. Ronald Reagan had to press hard to pass
his major spending and revenue changes in 1981 (Schick, 2008). Reagan
focused on lowering taxes, and a few years later Bill Clinton raised
them. Clinton also cut some defense funding and added to social
expenses, where Regan di the opposite. The same thing happened currently
as the last two Presidents have been associated with opposite parties
and opposing opinions.
These small adjustments still have macroeconomic ripples. History
has shown that no matter the political agenda of the President, if there
was an incumbent turnover within the White House, there were always
hefty policy changes. These policies applied pressure to economic tools
and programs spurring the specific programs and leaving the next
president to deal with changes and modifications as soon as possible.
See Figure 1. For an example of President Trumps 2018 Budget (OMB,
2018).
Q) What is your opinion of the line item veto in appropriations
bills? Ensure you back up your opinion with an example as to why you
think the way you do
A) Some argue that it would continue a trend of increasing the power
of the executive branch of government at the expense of the legislative
branch. Opponents also argue, and the Supreme Court has agreed, that the
line-item veto is unconstitutional. In addition, they say it would not
reduce wasteful spending and could even make it worse based on the
economic and political wit and prowess of the President.
In a 6-3 ruling issued on June 25, 1998,
the Supreme Court, in the case of Clinton v. City of New York upheld the
District Court’s decision, overturning the 1996 Line Item Veto Act as a
violation of the “Presentment Clause,” (Article I, Section 7), of the
U.S. Constitution. (United States Supreme Court, 1998)
The line-item veto to delete individual measures, is actually
amending bills, which is a legislative power granted exclusively to
Congress by the Constitution. However, I
believe it can be a powerful tool to reduce spending or reduce waste,
particularly in instances in which the branches of government are not
controlled by the same party. In 2011, there was a
proposed bill to give a president the ability to make recommendations
for rescissions from an appropriations bill. Those recommendations would
have received fast-track authority, requiring an immediate approval or
disapproval from Congress. The savings from rescissions would have been
required to be used for deficit reduction or a budget surplus. It sounds
logical, but the Senate never even considered the bill.
V/R,
Sully
References
OMB, O. o. (2018). FY2019 Budget: An American Budget. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018…
Schick, A. (2008). The Federal Budget: Politics, Policy, Process. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
United States Supreme Court. (1998, June 25). CLINTON, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL v. CITY OF NEW YORK. Retrieved from https://caselaw.findlaw.com: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/524/4…