NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/tx/politics/7516

Text File | 1992-11-19 | 1.3 KB | 29 lines

Newsgroups: tx.politics
Path: sparky!uunet!tcsi.com!iat.holonet.net!news.dell.com!natinst.com!cs.utexas.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!hari
From: [e-mail] (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: Clinton has won...watch your pocket!
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- [phone]
Distribution: tx
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:58:14 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 17

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> The key concept which you do not understand is the notion of checks and
> balances.  The President, as head of the Executive Branch of government is
> no more responsible for spending bills than the Chief Justice, as the head
> of the Judicial Branch, is.  Certainly the Chief Justice could declare most
> of the spending bills as unconstitutional.  That he hasn't certainly is

Give us a break John.  If the President has no responsibility for spending
bills then why does have the right to veto spending bills?  Why does he
submit a budget each year.

It sounds like you're finally ready to give all the credit for the growth
in the Reagan years to the Congress, since obviously Reagan had nothing to
do with the tax cuts.
--
Doug Andersen
[e-mail]