DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Cuccuccaltefe** · 04-09-2010, 09:46 PM

It doesn't particularly change the law;

We agree. If we accept Stupak's original arguement that the Senate bill allowed for abortion funding, the EO didn't change one thing wrt his objection then. If a president can't strike portions of bills he dislikes (line item veto), I fail to see the Constitutional arguement that would pass muster with the Courts that allows him to add bits to laws. It's also Congress that controls the funding of this law.

04-09-2010, 09:46 PM	#6
Cuccuccaltefe Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 561 Senior Member	It doesn't particularly change the law; We agree. If we accept Stupak's original arguement that the Senate bill allowed for abortion funding, the EO didn't change one thing wrt his objection then. If a president can't strike portions of bills he dislikes (line item veto), I fail to see the Constitutional arguement that would pass muster with the Courts that allows him to add bits to laws. It's also Congress that controls the funding of this law.
	Quote