H.R.1979 - Legislative Line Item Veto Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.1979, the Legislative Line Item Veto Act of 2025, aims to amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974. It seeks to grant the President the authority to propose cancellations of specific dollar amounts of discretionary budget authority, items of direct spending, or targeted tax benefits within 30 days of a bill's enactment. The bill outlines procedures for expedited congressional consideration of these proposed cancellations.
Expected Effects
If enacted, this bill would give the President increased power to control spending after Congress passes a bill. Congress would then have an expedited process to approve or disapprove the President's proposed cancellations, potentially leading to reduced spending and a greater focus on deficit reduction.
Potential Benefits
- Potential for Reduced Deficit: By allowing the President to propose cancellations, the bill aims to reduce wasteful spending and lower the national debt.
- Increased Fiscal Accountability: The line-item veto could make the government more accountable for how taxpayer money is spent.
- Expedited Congressional Review: The bill establishes a streamlined process for Congress to consider the President's proposed cancellations, ensuring timely action.
- Targeted Spending Cuts: The line-item veto allows for precise cuts to specific items, rather than broad, across-the-board reductions.
- Enhanced Presidential Authority: The bill strengthens the President's hand in budget negotiations and oversight.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for Executive Overreach: The line-item veto could shift too much power to the executive branch, undermining the legislative authority of Congress.
- Risk of Political Abuse: The President could use the line-item veto to target programs favored by political opponents or reward political allies.
- Disruption of Congressional Budget Process: The expedited review process could disrupt the normal legislative process and limit opportunities for debate and amendment.
- Unintended Consequences: Canceling specific items could have unforeseen negative impacts on programs or services.
- Erosion of Congressional Power of the Purse: By allowing the President to unilaterally cancel spending, the bill could weaken Congress's constitutional power over appropriations.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. Article I, Section 1 vests all legislative powers in Congress. The line-item veto could be viewed as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to the President. However, the bill attempts to address this by requiring Congress to approve the President's proposed cancellations through an expedited process. The Supreme Court previously struck down a similar law in Clinton v. City of New York (1998), finding it violated the Presentment Clause (Article I, Section 7, clauses 2 and 3). This bill attempts to address the concerns raised in that case by requiring an up or down vote by congress.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).