Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsLine Item
IN THE NEWS

Line Item

MORE STORIES ABOUT:
FEATURED ARTICLES
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 3, 2010 | By Shane Goldmacher
A California appeals court sided Tuesday with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in a fight with state lawmakers over his line-item veto authority. Last summer, Schwarzenegger cut about $500 million from a state spending plan passed by the Legislature, saying it was not balanced. Advocacy groups, supported by legislative leaders, filed a lawsuit arguing that the governor had overstepped his legal rights. Legislative leaders told the court Schwarzenegger did not have the right to use his line-item veto because the legislation they passed cut an existing budget.
ARTICLES BY DATE
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
June 29, 2012 | By Chris Megerian and Michael J. Mishak, Los Angeles Times
SACRAMENTO - Gov. Jerry Brown sliced $195.7 million from the budget that lawmakers sent him, disappointing fellow Democrats by taking money from child care, college scholarships and state parks and adding more to a rainy-day fund. In a series of line-item vetoes detailed Thursday, Brown brought general fund spending to $91.3 billion and the overall state budget, including dedicated funds and bond money, to $142.4 billion. The governor did not explain his vetoes publicly.
Advertisement
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 26, 1997
Unbelievable is all I can say after reading "Pork-Laden Bills on Way Despite Line-Item Veto" (Aug. 18)! There has been so much press about how wonderful the tax cut is for the poor and middle class, yet there are so many items in the bill that only benefit 100 people or less. How can either party have the nerve to forward a tax bill for passage with so many special interest tax credits intermingled? No wonder we have a $5-trillion debt! What is wrong with Clinton? He only narrowed down the list from 79 to 77. Obviously the line-item veto is not acting as a "deterrent against the most egregious kinds of projects that would otherwise not be funded."
BUSINESS
February 19, 2012 | Michael Hiltzik
The accepted response to the economic deal reached in Congress last week, extending the Social Security payroll tax holiday and unemployment insurance and maintaining reimbursement levels for Medicare doctors, is huzzah! Finally Congress got something important done with a minimum of brinkmanship and posturing, and more than a few minutes before the deadline. A threat to the embryonic economic recovery was averted, and the extensions even pushed any subsequent fracas over the same issues to the end of this year, safely past the presidential election.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 25, 1998
One of your Feb. 13 editorials called for the possibility of a constitutional amendment to make the line-item veto legal. Another editorial discussed a bill in the state Legislature that would require ballot initiatives be limited to a single subject. Hello? So, why not combine both ideas and solve two problems at once? Congress can pass a law that states: one item per proposed bill, written in plain and simple English, please. No more federal road projects that also contain a line-item allocating money for honey bees.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
February 25, 1992
Bethell's idea of assessing a congressman's district proportional to the outlay's he/she votes for would be impractical as well as penalize the poorer states. The only practical ways to decrease pork barrel and control the deficit is to give the President the line-item veto and enforce the rule that amendments to bills have to be related to the core reason for the bill. AUSTIN H. GALE, Los Angeles
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 21, 1995
It should be recognized that the current debacle in Washington has been caused by the decision to create the mother of all omnibus bills and force it through without the necessary thorough congressional debate and public hearings. The evils of omnibus bills have been recognized for years and this mess shows the need for the line-item veto. JOHN L. ALLEN Pacific Palisades
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 14, 1988
In response to your editorial "Vetoing a Sham" (Feb. 19) with quotes from columnist James J. Kilpatrick against a presidential line-item veto: I agree that presidential power has grown excessively toward making an "Imperial Presidency" and the line-item veto, if not offset, would increase it abominably. However, the omnibus budget measures the Congress sends to the President make him pass some revolting items. A line-item veto has some merit. It isn't that a President actually vetoes enough measures to make a great difference; his greater power is in the threat of vetoing measures.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 7, 1992
Using the old politician's trick of promising everything to everybody, Clinton got 43% of the vote. It's a fragile mandate at best, making it all the more important that he deliver on those promises. Sadly, recent reports suggest quite the opposite. For example, our new President-elect is already backing away from one of the most substantive of his campaign pledges--the line-item veto. Clinton and 42 other governors have found this tool a key to balancing state budgets. For the same reason it will work to help balance the federal budget; it stops politicians from passing the buck.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 23, 1987
In his zeal for jamming the legislative process for appropriations by the House of Representatives, David Broder (Op-Ed Page, Dec. 14) loses his sense of balance and perspective about spending legislation. He would allow Ronald Reagan the same stultifying power he had as governor whereby any item he chose was vetoed, requiring a two-thirds vote to pass over his veto. The Constitution stipulates that all tax and spending bills originate in the House of Representatives. It allows the President to approve or disapprove as he desires, but it also allows for the legislature to override a veto with a two-thirds majority.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
March 3, 2010 | By Shane Goldmacher
A California appeals court sided Tuesday with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in a fight with state lawmakers over his line-item veto authority. Last summer, Schwarzenegger cut about $500 million from a state spending plan passed by the Legislature, saying it was not balanced. Advocacy groups, supported by legislative leaders, filed a lawsuit arguing that the governor had overstepped his legal rights. Legislative leaders told the court Schwarzenegger did not have the right to use his line-item veto because the legislation they passed cut an existing budget.
OPINION
August 10, 2009 | Andrea Lynn Hoch and Jennifer Rockwell, Andrea Lynn Hoch is the legal affairs secretary for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Jennifer Rockwell is chief counsel, California Department of Finance.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger promised the people of California a balanced budget that closes the deficit and includes a healthy reserve that would allow us to respond to natural disasters and serve as a cushion in case revenues continue to fall. Yet two weeks ago, the Legislature sent the governor a budget that not only lacked a reserve but left our state $157 million in the red. Therefore, the governor used his customary, constitutional line-item-veto authority to make additional cuts in spending.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 8, 2009 | Patrick McGreevy
State Senate leader Darrell Steinberg said Friday that he will sue Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, challenging his use of line-item vetoes last month to make nearly $500 million in spending cuts to the budget. The Sacramento Democrat said he will file the lawsuit as an individual in San Francisco County Superior Court early next week and will tap political funds to pay for the legal action. "We elected a governor, not an emperor," Steinberg said at a Capitol news conference. "In making these line-item vetoes, the governor forced punishing cuts on children, the disabled and patients that he couldn't win fairly at the bargaining table.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 6, 2009 | Eric Bailey
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger exceeded his constitutional powers by imposing nearly $500 million in additional spending cuts last week to balance California's budget, according to an opinion Wednesday by the Legislature's legal counsel. Schwarzenegger drew fire from Democrats after he used his line-item veto authority to slice spending to health, welfare and other programs, going beyond the cuts that were part of a budget deal he struck just days earlier with legislative leaders.
NATIONAL
October 11, 2007 | Janet Hook, Times Staff Writer
In the arsenal of budget-cutting weapons revered by fiscal conservatives, few are as prized as the line-item veto -- a tool sought by presidents back to Ulysses S. Grant and made popular by Republican icon Ronald Reagan. That is why, when many conservatives are bitterly disappointed in President Bush for allowing the federal budget to burgeon, GOP presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Rudolph W.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 22, 2004 | Sue Fox, Times Staff Writer
Carlos Ovalle, a 10-year-old who was recently diagnosed with a neurobiological disorder that impairs social skills, is among 600 severely emotionally disturbed children in Los Angeles who will lose some key mental health services after a state program was virtually eliminated last month. Advocates and parents say the $20-million program, Children's System of Care, had been a lifeline for children like Carlos. Using his line-item veto, Gov.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 24, 1988
Shut my wallet but open my mouth so that I may protest the big pay hike proposed by a presidential commission to benefit members of Congress, federal judges and top Administration officials, including the President. Pay raises for members of the Cabinet would go to $149,250 and for members of Congress and judges to $135,000. But these same officials have already enjoyed eight pay raises since 1969. These pay increases are supposed to be compensation to replace pay received as honorariums for public speeches, etc. But what happened to the desire on the part of our officials to serve their country for patriotic reasons?
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 17, 1991
While many executives in large companies are paid reasonable salaries and perks for strenuous efforts in our competitive economy, too many of them are overpaid and some even underworked! As modest investors with frequent contacts with management, we have firsthand knowledge of the truth in Will's article. But this problem is not limited to our CEOs. No, it also impacts our taxpayers by the salaries and perks paid to "PEOs"--political executive officers! For instance in the last two years, members of Congress have voted themselves almost $25,000 pay increases at a time when we face a serious recession and the Treasury faces huge deficits generated by these same officials.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
August 1, 2004 | Evan Halper and Peter Nicholas, Times Staff Writers
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a $105.4-billion state budget before a cheering crowd Saturday, enacting a compromise spending plan that avoids new taxes but depends heavily on borrowing. Before signing the budget bill, Schwarzenegger used his veto power to trim an additional $116 million from social service, education and environmental programs on top of the cuts he already had worked out with legislative leaders. The budget is taking effect a month late.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
April 2, 2004 | Dan Morain, Times Staff Writer
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday turned up the pressure on the prison guards union to accept a pay cut, effectively inviting the Legislature to cut the $201.4-million raise that guards are scheduled to receive. Using a rather arcane bureaucratic procedure, Schwarzenegger notified the Legislature that he has changed the way employees' pay is displayed in the state budget.
Los Angeles Times Articles
|