5 ms·

Sure, but if the House and Senate were to pass it, it makes the President veto it (either explicitly or through inaction). This requires a higher level of supp

by e1ven 13y ago

Sure, but if the House and Senate were to pass it, it makes the President veto it (either explicitly or through inaction). This requires a higher level of support for the measure than previously expressed - At that point, you're saying "I as the Executive, think this is more important than the will of congress." Politically, that's harder to justify. There's also the (unlikely) scenario where it would have enough votes to override a veto, even if the President remained fully against it.

fleitz 13y ago
The president can't veto an amendment, he has to veto the entire bill. It would be hilarious if with out sufficient votes his veto resulted in the DoD having no money. Basically, he can't veto the bill and survive politically...
- e1ven 13y ago
  Certainly - But he could veto the bill, and tell them to resubmit with that clause removed. It'd bounce it back down, and start the process again - Upping the stakes on both sides. There's a lot of political tricks that could (and have) be used when congress and the President vehemently disagree. In this case, however, I don't think it'd ever get that far. I don't think the issue is popular enough pass the senate, nevermind with a veto-proof majority. Even then, The Senate is run by the Dems, and (IMO) they're unlikely to want override a veto on a President of their own party.
  - betterunix 13y ago
    "Certainly - But he could veto the bill, and tell them to resubmit with that clause removed. It'd bounce it back down, and start the process again - Upping the stakes on both sides." It would be interesting to see what his supporters say if that happens. Remember how Obama did not do this with the NDAA that allowed indefinite detentions? His supporters were claiming that nothing could be done because it is suicidal to veto funding for the troops.
- binarycrusader 13y ago
  There's still the as yet to be clarified potential loophole of signing statements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement
  - rhizome 13y ago
    It would be a permanent embarrassment to his legacy to perpetuate this state of affairs via a signing statement. At the very least, I doubt his ego would allow it.

by e1ven 13y ago

fleitz 13y ago

The president can't veto an amendment, he has to veto the entire bill. It would be hilarious if with out sufficient votes his veto resulted in the DoD having no money. Basically, he can't veto the bill and survive politically...

e1ven 13y ago
Certainly - But he could veto the bill, and tell them to resubmit with that clause removed. It'd bounce it back down, and start the process again - Upping the stakes on both sides. There's a lot of political tricks that could (and have) be used when congress and the President vehemently disagree. In this case, however, I don't think it'd ever get that far. I don't think the issue is popular enough pass the senate, nevermind with a veto-proof majority. Even then, The Senate is run by the Dems, and (IMO) they're unlikely to want override a veto on a President of their own party.
- betterunix 13y ago
  "Certainly - But he could veto the bill, and tell them to resubmit with that clause removed. It'd bounce it back down, and start the process again - Upping the stakes on both sides." It would be interesting to see what his supporters say if that happens. Remember how Obama did not do this with the NDAA that allowed indefinite detentions? His supporters were claiming that nothing could be done because it is suicidal to veto funding for the troops.
binarycrusader 13y ago
There's still the as yet to be clarified potential loophole of signing statements: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement
- rhizome 13y ago
  It would be a permanent embarrassment to his legacy to perpetuate this state of affairs via a signing statement. At the very least, I doubt his ego would allow it.