Our politicians, Congress and the President, in their speeches - it's been discussed for years now and they could never agree to do it.
How old are you????? Carter took office in 76 and oil was not that bad...56-65 cents per gallon...by 79' it was 1.20...Nixon and Ford didn;t have the oil price problem
Then perhaps the state Governors should have a line item veto over what the President proposes. Maybe then we would not have such a massive Federal entitlement increase that have been pushed to the state under Bush the Older and Bush the younger.
Speeches? You gotta be shitting me man...you aren't actually citing speeches as done by profession wordsmiths as proposed law? You're smarter than this.
Whenever you have a legislative body proposing and an executive signing off or vetoing, line item veto makes excellent sense.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Gerald Ford's presidential term was as much marked by the economic forces of inflation as it was by the political fortunes of the time. Ford, who was sworn in as president on Aug. 9, 1974, after the resignation of Richard Nixon, faced inflation that was already surging at a 10.9 percent annual rate in that month. It was thrust into overdrive by the OPEC oil embargo of 1974 and the elimination of wage/price controls instituted in the Nixon administration. As energy constituted more of the nation's GDP in the early 1970s, soaring gas prices had an even more profound effect on the U.S. economy than recent gas price hikes have. Rising energy prices also contributed to higher unemployment by slowing consumer demand for companies' products, according to Mark Ratkus, economics professor at LaSalle University in Philadelphia. Ford's approach to controlling inflation, according to his White House biography, was through modest tax cuts and spending restraints. He also sought to "decontrol" energy prices in order to stimulate production...... http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/27/news/newsmakers/gerald_ford/
The problem is that's a not how it works. The President proposes and the legislative signs off on it.
What I'm saying is that whenever this is discussed, the Constitution is never mentioned as a problem. They can do it if they agreed to it. But they don't, each side wants too much power to themselves.
Yes, they send it back full of changes. Plus, next time that Congess is to authorize a bill to buy a new ship for the Navy, people add money to research the secret behavior of hosexual fleas and build roads to nowhere, which doubles the cost of everything, all the time.