I bet the President will Veto

[jon593]

Oh he reeds alright

then sits there for 7 minutes when told the country is under attack.


there isnt a chance in the world he will veto a bill that his party got pushed through. the only chance we have now is the supreme court which is a bush appoiiinted court. its pretty mush guerenteed this will go there with all the money that is involved

[Cynthia777]

Does the President have authority or right of veto over specific sections of a bill (such as an Intenret gambling unrelated attachment) or must he either accept the entire Bill before him or reject it in its entirety?

Edited to add that I would be surprised if Bush did not sign this in.

There is another bill/issue out there.. which would aid us greatly in this situation (and depending if he does in our favor).. the "Veto Line Act". I don't have the bill number or specifics right now...but basically allows the President to veto certain portions of an act, thus allowing him to pass the primary bill..but throw out some provisions.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE use that on Frist's provision!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cynthia777]

It's officially called the "Line-Item Veto"

[Cynthia777]

Ok folks, now what we need to start doing is writing to President Bush about using his "Line-Item Veto" power on this Frist attachment to the approved bill it rode on.

Despite any discouragement, the least we can do is bring his attention to this so it is not overlooked by any means

[Macgyver]

I'm going to start another thread with this, but this is something I just cranked out and will be emailing shortly. You can obviously change the name of the person who this is being sent to, but take the time to make sure any pronouns reflect the proper gender.

Dear President Bush:

I write to you as a very concerned citizen in light of the newly passed Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006. I urge you to strongly consider using your “Line-Item Veto” power to pass the port security bill, but veto the part of the bill concerning online gambling that was underhandedly included by members of Congress.

The United States was born on the belief that it is the land of the free. Throughout all the trials and tribulations that the country has gone through in over 230 years, one thing has remained constant and true; Americans have an inalienable right to privacy and the freedom of choice. The Internet Gambling Enforcement Act flies in the face of those rights and forces banks and financial institutions into a role that they do not want nor are equipped to handle.

Secondly, the way the Act was enacted under cover of the port security bill reeks of suspicion and political gerry-mandering. Nowhere in the way the Act was handled by certain Senators recognized the need for a thorough debate and investigation into this timely matter. On the contrary, the Act was slipped into the bill as a last-minute addition into the port security bill that was certain to pass through Congress because of its timeliness and need. No Senators were given the opportunity to voice opposition to the Act or study the issue before a vote was called.

Our government is also built on the belief, though some may consider it naïve, that our elected representatives will act in the best interest of the citizens. The United States could stand to take a long, hard look at the benefits of regulating and/or licensing online gambling as not only an option to ease the national debt, but to also provide financing to hot-button topics such as education or national security.

Again, as a patriotic member of this fine country, I urge you to take the time and consider vetoing any and all line-items that coincide with the Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. Show not only your support of this country’s need for security from foreign invasion, but its need for security from unwanted and unneeded domestic invasion into our homes, personal computers and freedom of choice.

Thank you for your time, sir.

Sincerely,

Now that's what I'm talking about!

[Simmo!]

Reads well

[Westland Bowl]

Seems good, Macgyver. Me, being me, I prolly modify it to make the fact stand out that this online gambling provision had no debate or discussion whatsoever. And in light of Foley's folly and that Frist was best buddies with him, means to me that Frist and Foley have the same values. Strike out the damn thing!

[Macgyver]

I've modified the email/letter a little to put some more focus on what Westland Bowl brought up.

This can definitely be considered a work-in-progress.

[lots0]

Supreme Court Strikes Down Line-Item Veto - June 25, 1998

[Cynthia777]

But it has since then been re-introduced, already passed by the House (H.R. 4890 Legislative Line Item Veto Act of 2006 (Introduced in House)) and a Senate bill S. 2381 Legislative Line Item Veto Act of 2006 (Introduced in Senate).