Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post
Newsgroups: americast.wpost
From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com
Organization: American Cybercasting
Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com
Subject: Byrd Opposes Line-Item Veto Proposal; Clinton May Face Stiff Senate Fight<By
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 04:53:56 EST
Message-ID: <28.1992Nov18.045356@AmeriCast.com>

Byrd Opposes Line-Item Veto Proposal; Clinton May Face Stiff Sen-
ate Fight<By Eric Pianin=Washington Post Staff Writer=

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert C. Byrd (D-
W.Va.), a dominant force on spending issues and a vigilant guar-
dian of congressional powers, looms as the major obstacle to ef-
forts to grant President-elect Clinton enhanced authority to
strike unwanted spending.

Clinton, who advocates a presidential line-item veto power to
discourage "pork-barrel projects," said Monday he was intrigued
by an alternative backed by House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-
Wash.). It would allow the president to disapprove a particular
spending provision subject to override by a simple majority of
the House and Senate.

The line-item veto was among the scores of issues on the table
Sunday evening, when Clinton and his wife, Hillary, met for
dinner with Foley, House Majority Leader Richard A.  Gephardt
(D-Mo.) and Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Maine).
"As I have made clear time and time again, I'm opposed to any
legislation that would diminish the Congress's constitutional
role with respect to the power of the purse and transfer addi-
tional authority to the executive branch," Byrd said in a state-
ment released by his office yesterday.

Byrd made the same statement last month, in the closing days of
the 102nd Congress, when the House voted 312 to 97 to approve a
so-called enhanced recision power for the president. The Senate
declined to take it up. "He really hasn't changed his views,"
said an aide to Byrd.

Byrd was instrumental in defeating a popular balanced-budget
amendment proposal in the Senate earlier this year, and the
threat of a Byrd-led filibuster would significantly dampen the
prospects for any type of line-item veto measure in the 103rd
Congress.

Rep. Charles W.  Stenholm (D-Tex.), an author of the measure be-
ing pushed by Foley, said yesterday that Byrd's argument is spe-
cious and predicted that Democrats would pull together to adopt
the bill.

"I can't envision one senator stopping it if the majority wants
it," Stenholm said. "I think, in the end, Senator Byrd is going
to be a team player."

Much will depend on whether Mitchell, who said he would consider
the plan, chooses to ally himself with the House Democrats and
risk a messy floor fight with Byrd.

Senate Minority Leader Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) and House Minority
Leader Robert H. Michel (R-Ill.), who promoted the line-item veto
throughout the Reagan and Bush administrations, said through
spokesmen yesterday that they were still considering Foley's ap-
proach. However, Michel was among 154 House Republicans who voted
for the enhanced recision proposal last month.

Under the existing recision rules, the president may propose el-
iminating programs or specific funding from enacted spending
legislation, but Congress is free to ignore the proposal.

The approach backed by Foley and Stenholm is similar to Arkansas'
line-item veto and would guarantee congressional votes.

Within three days of signing a spending bill, the president could
submit a recision message and a package of proposed cuts. The re-
cisions would be introduced in the House and then referred to the
Appropriations Committee, which would have seven legislative days
in which to report out the bill without substantive changes.  If
the committee fails to act by then, the bill is automatically
discharged and any member could call it up.

If a simple majority of House members votes to defeat the bill,
then the funds are automatically released. If the measure is ap-
proved by a majority, the bill is then sent to the Senate, where
it is subject to the same procedure.<02:21 11-18C9999-----

Copyright 1992, The Washington Post.  This story is from the
Washington Post's Capitol Edition On-Line and is not to be ar-
chived or redistributed.

For more information, send-email to American Cybercasting Cor-
poration (usa@AmeriCast.COM)