Search Details

Word: item (lookup in dictionary) (lookup stats)
Dates: during 1980-1989
Sort By: most recent first (reverse)


Usage:

...last hoary number for the better part of a decade, the tune did not originate with him. Ever since Ulysses S. Grant in 1876, Presidents have asked Congress for the power to reject individual appropriations without wiping out an agency's entire budget. Reagan has argued that a line-item veto would allow him to rein in the big spenders on Capitol Hill and bring down the deficit. Says a White House aide: "What we're talking about is changing a pattern of behavior that has existed for a long time...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Taking A Scalpel to the Deficit | 2/1/1988 | See Source »

...Capitol Hill, Reagan's case for the line-item veto suddenly seems a little more convincing. "I used to think the line-item veto was the stupidest idea in the world," says Stephen Bell, former staff director of the Senate Budget Committee. "I was wrong." Republican Senator Bob Packwood of Oregon thinks Congress will eventually be forced to pass the reform. "We're going to be ridiculed into doing it," he says. "I've come to the conclusion that we are not going to be capable of governing ourselves." In discussing the veto, Senator Ted Kennedy recently said something...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Taking A Scalpel to the Deficit | 2/1/1988 | See Source »

...while a line-item veto might help diminish budget pork, it would have only a negligible impact on the deficit. Huge chunks of the budget -- Social Security, Medicare and other entitlement programs, which total more than $325 billion -- are granted automatically and do not require annual % reauthorization. Other spending measures, such as agricultural support programs ($26 billion), are politically sacrosanct. And while some Democrats might be ready to chop away at the $298 billion in defense spending, substantial Pentagon cuts would be unlikely under any Republican Administration. Thus, spending that is truly discretionary (read politically negotiable) amounts to less than...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Taking A Scalpel to the Deficit | 2/1/1988 | See Source »

Some observers think the line-item veto would actually lead to an increase in Government spending. Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, points out that in 1985 Reagan asked for 100 MX missiles, but Congress gave him only 50. If Reagan had had the line-item veto, says Ornstein, he could have used it to squeeze lawmakers, threatening to eradicate programs in their districts if they did not support the vastly more expensive MX. In Ornstein's opinion, Presidents, not legislators, are traditionally inclined to budgetary extravagance. "They have to make their mark in a relatively...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Taking A Scalpel to the Deficit | 2/1/1988 | See Source »

Aside from Ted Kennedy, most congressional Democrats consider Reagan's fiscal pieties gross hypocrisy. "His has been the biggest spending Administration in history," fumes House Budget Chairman William Gray of Pennsylvania. "And every year he returns to the tired old rhetoric that a line-item veto is the magic wand that would bring down Government spending...

Author: /time Magazine | Title: Taking A Scalpel to the Deficit | 2/1/1988 | See Source »

Previous | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | Next