FOR THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, “IGNORANCE IS BLISS”

…The not-so-smart Trump Treasury Secretary, Steve Mnuchin

 

If Steve Mnuchin is one of Trump’s “Best of the Best”, we need a new definition of “Best”.

 

It’s too bad that the revolving door at the White House isn’t ejecting the current Treasury Secretary, Steve Mnuchin.

 

First, he got his ass in a sling for taking his wife on a honeymoon and trying to charge her costs off on to the US taxpayers.

 

Now, being that he doesn’t seem to understand anything about  governing, nor about the US Constitution, Mr. Mnuchin should at least just try keeping his mouth shut and learning some things, instead of embarrassing himself and the country on national television.

 

Here is the conversation Mnuchin had with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday, of which I am referring:

 

·       Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin: “I think they should give the president a line-item veto.”

·       Wallace: “But that’s been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, sir.”

·       Mnuchin: “Well, again, Congress could pass a rule, okay, that allows them to do it.”

·       Wallace: “No, no, sir, it would be a constitutional amendment.”

·       Mnuchin: “Chris, we don’t — we don’t need to get into a debate in terms of — there’s different ways of doing this.”

 

And this is not just the attitude of the Treasury Secretary.  It’s also of the president, as President Trump wants Congress to give him a powerful tool to trim spending called: “the line-item veto”.

 

Sorry Steve and Mr. President, but Chris Wallace is correct.  The US Supreme Court ruled the “line-item-veto” unconstitutional in 1998. Legal experts therefore agree that the only way to grant this power to the president is by amending the Constitution.

 

To do that, amendments cannot be ratified until two-thirds of the House and the Senate approve of an amendment proposal.  Then it is sent to each of the states for a vote. Three-fourths of all of the states must affirm the proposed Amendment.

 

Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the proposal to be approved as an amendment.  Because this item was already ruled as unconstitutional, a proposed line-item-veto for the president would probably take the full 7 years to be passed, or it might never be passed.  In any case, Trump would be out of the office, even if he won a 2^nd term, which is becoming highly questionable.

 

Also of Course, Trump just had to join in embarrassing himself and the country when he recently stated: “To prevent the omnibus bill situation from ever happening again, I’m calling on Congress to give me a line-item veto for all government spending bills.”

 

This all started when Trump, without knowing what was in the bill, went ahead and signed a 2700 page, $1.3 trillion spending package. He said it was the last time he would approve such bloated spending bill.  (We'll see about that!)

 

 

But here are the facts about the line-item veto idea:

 

 

Governors in 44 states have the power to delete or reduce specific line items in bills passed by their legislatures. The “line-item veto” effectively gives these governors the last word on spending decisions. They can pare down spending bills and then sign those bills into law, without having to ask lawmakers to approve the cuts. In most states, these vetoes may be overturned only by large legislative majorities.

 

 

The president, however, only has the power to sign or veto entire bills. He can’t go around slicing and dicing spending items here and there.  For the US president, it’s all or nothing.

 

The 44 states here include all but Indiana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Vermont.  However, these states have their own versions of the line-item-veto written into their state constitutions.

 

But the US Constitution does not come with this feature, and the Supreme Court ruled in 1998 that lawmakers could not add it to the mix with an act of Congress. The justices voted 6 to 3 to strike down the Line Item Veto Act, signed by President Bill Clinton, in a case called Clinton v. City of New York.

 

“The Constitution explicitly requires that each of those three steps be taken before a bill may ‘become a law,’ ” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the court majority. “If the Line Item Veto Act were valid, it would authorize the president to create a different law, one whose text was not voted on by either house of Congress or presented to the president for signature.”

 

There are ways for a president to put a spending bill on hold for a limited number of days which could allow the House and the Senate to vote to remove some items from a spending bill.  But that’s not a line-item veto as the state’s governors have today.

 

The US Supreme Court was not arguing over technicalities in 1998. It rejected the very idea of a president with unilateral powers to delete or rewrite sections of the law. The court specifically said the line-item veto would require a constitutional amendment…period.

 

Our reality-show president that doesn’t read, was obviously unaware of this history.  However, the US Treasury Secretary should have been better informed before going on national television to argue the White House’s position against basic US Civics.

 

Rightfully, for this total on-going ignorance, the Fact Checkers at The Post have awarded Secretary Mnuchin, Four, very large, wooden-nosed Pinocchio’s.

 

Copyright G.Ater  2018