Line-Item Veto: a Tool for Saving, but No Panacea : Social Security and Medicare will remain untouchable

The ink was barely dry on President Clinton’s signature before skeptics began grousing that the line-item veto law--an extraordinary ceding of congressional authority to the executive--would not do much to cut federal spending. Measured against the swollen claims made in years past by fervid advocates of the veto, that’s no doubt true. The veto power, which becomes effective next Jan. 1 and continues for eight years, will at best produce only marginal savings in $1.5-trillion-plus federal budgets. But even such modest cuts would be welcome. As the late Republican Senate Leader Everett C. Dirksen famously noted, “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money.”

The line-item veto lets presidents selectively cut appropriations, rather than giving them no choice but to veto an entire bill or accept its unwanted spending provisions. It’s a power given governors in 43 states, including California.

The new law does less than purists hoped because that’s the way Congress, ever zealous to retain its potent power over the purse, wants it to be. Excluded from the president’s new authority are all entitlement programs, led by Social Security and Medicare, which, along with interest on the debt, account for nearly two-thirds of federal spending. What’s left is discretionary spending, in which, as President Clinton put it, “special-interest boondoggles, tax loopholes and pure pork” are often found. Thus if a Congress again chooses to inflate the annual cost-of-living increase given Social Security recipients--election years are favorite times for such largess--a president couldn’t say no. Not that many presidents would be so inclined in any event.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), long a backer of the line-item veto, describes its enactment as “an acknowledgment that Congress is incapable institutionally of stopping pork-barrel spending.”

Few in Congress in their honest moments would disagree. The corollary, of course, is that pork-barrel spending is not about to come to a sudden halt. Deals will still be cut, not just in Congress but between presidents and Congress, to assure that federal money is spent on projects and programs whose main value is to the reelection chances of their sponsors. But with the line-item veto, there’s at least a good chance that some of the nuttier and least defensible of these will be eliminated. And that will be a favor to all taxpayers.