`baby Jesus' Kidnapped 
From W-b Public Square 
Annual Nativity Scene Missing 
An Important Player

Loretta Christie 
Nov. 20, 1992 
Loretta Christie, Of Main Street, Inkerman, Jenkins Township, Died Friday At 
Home.

Sunday, November 22, 1992 &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Page: 3A QUICK WORDS: FOLEY 





Foley proposes a sound alternative to line-item veto ne of the hoary
demands -- like a balanced budget amendment and prayer in schools --
sloganeered by both Presidents Reagan and Bush, is to give the president of
the United States the power of the line-item vetoWhat such power would mean is
that when the legislature -- in this case, the Congress -- adopts a spending
bill and sends it to the president for his signature, the president can first
go through it, line-by-line, and pencil out any appropriation, any
authorization with which he disagrees. He could not increase nor decrease. He
could only accept or reject each proposal. Like the existing power of the
veto, the deletion would be subject to congressional review, requiring a
two-thirds majority in both houses to overturn. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Supporters of the proposal argue that all the president could do is to
reduce the proposed expenditures, to cut the spending. And, they are able to
point out that the governors of most states in the nation have that or similar
power --and use it. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Those who advocate giving such new power to the president advance some
other arguments,too. They claim it would enable a president to cut the "fat"
out of the budget and other money bills. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 What they mean is, it would enable a president to strike out funds for such
things as moving upwards of $1 billion worth of federal offices from
Washington, D.C. to the home state of the awesomely powerful chairman of the
Senate Appropriations Committee -- Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Or, the president could eliminate funding for the politically inspired
commitment to build the hybrid helicopter that no one in the Department of
Defense wants -- but which would be a boon to the economy of more than 20
states. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Or, the president could eliminate the last $14 million for Rep. Joe
McDade's Steamtown project, or Rep. Paul Kanjorski's $20 million purchase of
Blue Coal lands, or whatever comparable goodies that have been inserted into
the national budget by each or groups of the remaining 532 senators and
representatives of the Congress. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Of course, such advocates don't expect a president to touch those
authorizations or appropriations which he favors, or which his supporters in
the Congress favor. But a consequence would be spending measures that are even
more partisan than these can be now. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Another consequence would be to give the president the ability to use his
power selectively -- as a sort of club (some of the uncouth would call it
blackmail) -- to persuade members of the Congress to line up behind
legislation the president wants but troublesome numbers of the congressmen
don't. It wouldn't take long for a congressman to learn that if he wants a
little "walking around money" (you can call federal fat that, too), he must
first trade in his vote to the president for whatever the president wants. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Considering the consequences of both of these -- more partisan budgets and
more selective corruption -- the claimed rewards of a line-item veto seem more
expensive than it's worth. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 here is a third consideration that can take the cost into outer space.
Presidents already hold dangerous concentrations of power -- power to alter
the character of the federal courts, for example; power to carry out daunting
military exercises such as the invasion of Panama and Grenada, or of Vietnam
without a declaration of war; power to usurp and defy the Congress by gagging
doctors; or selectively refusing to enforce laws which a president finds for
whatever reason to be undesirable to him -- to mention but a few current
examples -- without giving the office more power. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Just the last 20 years have produced more than enough evidence of abuse of
presidential power. Still unrevealed and untried claims exist that point to
even more gross abuses of power by its occupants and/or appointees. There is a
resultant imbalance of power among the three branches of government that needs
to be righted before the nation proceeds. There is reason to believe that what
the presidency needs is less, not more, power. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Still, Reagan and Bush have stirred up more sentiment than perhaps can be
restrained. And, President-elect Clinton has given his support to the concept. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 A compromise may be the proposal offered by House Speaker Thomas Foley,
D-Wash. Foley suggests that, instead of a line-item veto, the president could
be given the power to propose what he calls line item "rescissions." That is,
a president's line-item veto would not only be subject to override by the
Congress but, instead of requiring a two-thirds majority by both houses to
overturn, the line-item rescission would require only a majority vote by each
chamber to overturn. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 The Foley compromise may not be acceptable to Clinton. Surely it will not
satisfy -- except, perhaps as an interim step toward realization of the
ultimate -- Reagan, Bush, or other advocates of increased presidential power.
However, unless a majority of the members of the Congress lose their
commitment to the Constitution, and to their own self-respect, anything more
than the Foley compromise won't fly -- not in the next Congress and,
hopefully, never. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 
 Tom Bigler is a Times Leader columnist. His column appears on Sundays and
Wednesdays.

Foley Proposes A 
Sound Alternative 
To Line-item Veto 
Ne Of The Hoary Demands -- Like A Balanced Budget Amendment And Prayer In 
Schools -- Sloganeered By Both Presidents Reagan And Bush, Is To Give The 
President Of The United States The Power Of The Line-item Veto.

Foley Proposes A Sound Alternative To Line-item Veto Ne Of The Hoary Demands -- Like A Balanced Budget Amendment And Prayer In Schools -- Sloganeered By Both Presidents Reagan And Bush, Is To Give The President Of The United States The Power Of The Line-item Veto.