Hot answers tagged

68

It's a good idea if you think the President should have much stronger powers than other branches, and that legislative compromise should be eliminated, as part of the system, altogether. As much as we hate the way legislation is bundled, it is, quite often the way to work compromise into the system. I don't vote for measure "A", but I want measure "B", ...


61

If Congress has the 2/3 votes to override a Presidential veto, they can pass any budget they want with zero consideration for what the President thinks. Ever since the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, the President no longer has the authority to refuse spending Congressionally allocated funds. Therefore Republicans are free to end the shutdown by agreeing ...


55

In addition to the problem of veto-proof majorities the others have noted, there's another factor: he can always choose to selectively not enforce or otherwise comply with the portions of the law he deems unconstitutional. Thus he can keep the portions of the law he says he does agree with, while ignoring the allegedly unconstitutional parts (he is obliged ...


49

It is a bug in the process, but it's one that has been present (and un-addressed) for more than a quarter century. When the National Emergencies Act was passed in 1976, it originally said that an emergency would be terminated if each house of Congress voted to do so. Thus a simple majority of both houses was supposed to be able to revoke the emergency. ...


38

The monarch of the United Kingdom is, as are most contemporary monarchies, a historical artefact, with little (if any) political power, their role is largely ceremonial. Refusal of royal assent is rarely exercised any more, and the main reason is, as you suspected, respect for democracy. Conversely, the last time royal assent was refused in the UK was in ...


38

Why have US Presidents not been given the power of line item vetoes They have. Congress passed the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, but it was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Clinton v. City of New York in 1998 at the request of Rudy Giuliani and others. To pass it in a constitutional fashion would require a constitutional amendment, and ...


35

The presidential veto powers are not unlimited. In particular, Congress can override it if 2/3 of the members of each chamber vote to do so. The bill has been adopted with overwhelming majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives (so-called “veto-proof majority”). One concern could therefore be that vetoing the bill would simply result in ...


27

Because to do so would cause a constitutional crisis. As the Wikipedia article on the subject lists, previous such crises have more typically been caused by the head of state acting against the advice of the government on matters such as dissolving Parliament, or dismissing or appointing Prime Ministers. However, the underlying issue is the same: in ...


27

When the President vetoes a bill, Congress can force it into law by voting it again with a 2/3 majority. Practice is so that when there's a strong likelihood of that happening, POTUS usually spares itself the humiliation of getting overridden and just signs it. This particular bill passed with 419-3 in the House, and 98-2 in the Senate.


24

Because there are more effective ways for Her Majesty to change or veto laws. The Queen can indeed veto a law after it has passed the Houses of Parliament, but it would be ill-advised. Instead, she can use her considerable "soft power" to warn the Prime Minister of her disagreement with the law before it is voted upon. Such warnings are secret, but are ...


22

You can find the list of vetoed resolutions on Wikipedia. Many of the vetoes are related to the Middle East, with the US or Russia exercising their veto power for the benefit of a local ally. Other regular veto-inducing topics tend to be more localized in time -- vetoes on new memberships, Cyprus conflict, India-Pakistan conflict, South African apartheid, ...


16

They can, with 2/3 majority in both houses (US Constitution, Article 1, Section 7, clause 2)...but they have to agree to actually hold that vote. Currently, the Senate has indicated that it will not do so, without the bill being something the President will not veto. So effectively, they are choosing not to create a scenario where they would have the option ...


16

If they were to override his veto, would this end the shutdown, or would the President somehow be able to continue it anyway? This would end the shutdown. I wonder if there is any argument that, even if Congress allocates money for the Government, it is up to the President to decide whether to actually spend it. Congress appropriates money for specific ...


16

The President has that power because the authority to veto legislation is an enumerated power from the Constitution. The conflict exists now because the Congress has surrendered an excess amount of legislative and pecuniary authority to the Executive Branch. the National Emergency Act gives the President some narrowed powers compared to the previous ...


16

There are probably no stats exactly for what you ask, but the common examples of often vetoed issues are the Molotov doctrine of vetoing new UN members (pre-1970) because the UN general assembly didn't have enough votes (two-thirds majority) in favor of admitting the Eastern Europe Soviet-client states (like Albania, Bulgaria, Hungaria, or Romania). the ...


13

The answer is No, since Russia is one of the five permanent members of the Security Council. All permanent members have a veto right, and they can any substantive resolution by the Council. The word "permanent" is clear enough that Russia always remains in that position. You are not the first to ask the question since many members of the United Nations have ...


13

Bills have taken effect pursuant to the 10 day rule under the Presentment clause in the United States federal government, but this is rare. Only eight such bills have become law in this manner since 1973. In the same time period 31 bills were enacted via a veto override, and 17,321 bills were enacted with the President's signature.


13

The Government Printing Office (GPO) has digitized much of the Congressional Record. A search there will bring you to a page like this one where you will find the CR for July 11, 1932. On pages 15040-41, the explanation is given: To the House of Representatives: I am returning herewith, without my approval, H. R. 12445, " Emergency relief and ...


13

Wikipedia has the complete list of vetoes. France, UK, US joined force: twice in 1989 regarding Panama and Libya; in 1986 regarding Libya; 4 times in 1981 regarding Namibia; 3 times in 1977 regarding South Africa; in 1976 regarding Namibia; in 1975 regarding Namibia; in 1974 regarding South Africa.


12

In short, President Obama doesn't have any tools against a congressional override. If a bill is passed with such an overwhelming number of votes, 99:0 in the Senate and 419:1 in the House of Representatives, it is almost impossible for any president to stop the bill from becoming law. It takes two thirds of votes in both houses to override President's ...


12

What is the point of the UN Security council if permanent members have veto power? The Security Council's main purpose is to reduce the risk of accidentally starting World War III. The point is that when no veto is used, a resulting conflict is very unlikely to grow from a minor conflict into a major conflict. For any council to work that way, a veto for ...


11

The right of the 5 permanent member of the Security Council to veto its decisions is enshrined in Article 27, paragraph 3 of the Charter of the United Nations: Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members Because this is part of the ...


10

It's basically a cloture vote. Introduction A three-fifths majority (60 votes) is required in the Senate to invoke a cloture in most cases. This's because the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths in 1975 since a two-thirds is very difficult to obtain. However, invoking cloture on a measure or motion to ...


9

The better question here is not 'what is the point', but why us the UN Security Council designed in this way. The answer to that comes from the close of the second World War (actually you can go further back to the League of Nations and WWI, but lets keep it simple). Who were the major powers of the victors of WWII? Why it turns out to be the same list: the ...


8

The President's travel ban executive order, at the time of this answer, has been put on hold by the judicial branch while it decides whether the order was actually legal. It could very well decide that the order was an overreach of presidential authority and overturn it. Even the president must abide by the limits that the Constitution and federal laws grant ...


7

Because it allows the President to pass a bill that is fundamentally different from the one Congress sent him. To go back to civics class 101, the House or Senate proposes a bill that, upon passage in that house, gets sent to the other. The other then makes amendments or writes is own version and passes it back. The bill goes back and forth until both ...


7

I'm just curious how hard an override of the veto to restart the goverment is? Very hard. It requires 67 votes in the Senate (assuming that there are no vacancies at the time and no one fails to vote) and 290 votes in the House (making the same assumptions), i.e. two-thirds majorities in each house. The one vacancy in the House doesn't change the ...


6

It takes two thirds to override a presidential veto, not 60%. Two thirds rounds to roughly 67%. And that's of both chambers, not just the Senate. Presidents do veto all or almost all of the legislation that they dislike. The reason that so few bills are vetoed is that presidents like more about most legislation than they dislike. Congress only sends ...


6

Yes, it is :0 A Veto, from its very Latin definition, means "I forbid." It does not have the power to create a thing, only to forbid the implementation and ratification of a thing. When the President vetoes a law, he is telling Congress, this law may not be implemented. The closest thing to "creating" would be if the line item veto were enacted, and if ...


6

Any legislation passed by the lame-duck Congress will already have been disposed of by the time the new President takes office. Most likely, the outgoing President will have some opinion on the bill and will have chosen either to sign or veto it. However, even if the old President takes no action, the bill will not reach the new President's desk. The ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible