Former President Gerald Ford gets credit for just a few things. He should get more credit for vetoing spending bills. Three days after he was sworn in, he told a joint session of Congress ...
It does no good to blame the public for spending too much when the government is spending too much.
Then, the vetoes began. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer
editorializes here:
He vetoed 39 spending bills in his first 14 months in office.
In one of those veto messages, Ford captured perfectly the politics of federal spending, saying he was caught in the "dilemma of offending the voting groups who benefit by these government programs," he said, adding he was indeed sympathetic with the purposes of the money. "My objection to this legislation is based purely and simply on the issue of fiscal integrity."
That is a notion worthy of emulation.
Has any recent Chief Executive had that kind of intestinal fortitude on spending? Nope.
Caleb O. Brown of the Bluegrass Institute handicaps the key risk and possible reward in General Assembly 2007:
After signing a budget in May that obligated taxpayers to $2.4 billion in additional debt, [Gov. Ernie] Fletcher then trumpeted his very modest veto of $370 million in bonded projects, much of which was pork-barrel spending. However, he then turned around and indicated that the vetoed projects could return … and soon. At the time, the governor told reporters that he wasn’t opposed to the vetoed projects, but that they just could not be approved this year.
Since many of these projects were scheduled for the second year of Kentucky’s two-year budget cycle, expect Fletcher and his fellow big spenders in the General Assembly to push state spending even higher by insisting on restoring funding for these projects. With the governor seeking another term in 2007, lawmakers likely will press the advantage by asking for more spending in their districts.
Don't just expect the big spenders in Frankfort to double down with your dollars, bank on it.
Former President Gerald Ford gets credit for just a few things. He should get more credit for vetoing spending bills. Three days after he was sworn in, he told a joint session of Congress ...
It does no good to blame the public for spending too much when the government is spending too much.
Then, the vetoes began. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer
editorializes here:
He vetoed 39 spending bills in his first 14 months in office.
In one of those veto messages, Ford captured perfectly the politics of federal spending, saying he was caught in the "dilemma of offending the voting groups who benefit by these government programs," he said, adding he was indeed sympathetic with the purposes of the money. "My objection to this legislation is based purely and simply on the issue of fiscal integrity."
That is a notion worthy of emulation.
Has any recent Chief Executive had that kind of intestinal fortitude on spending? Nope.
Caleb O. Brown of the Bluegrass Institute handicaps the key risk and possible reward in General Assembly 2007:
After signing a budget in May that obligated taxpayers to $2.4 billion in additional debt, [Gov. Ernie] Fletcher then trumpeted his very modest veto of $370 million in bonded projects, much of which was pork-barrel spending. However, he then turned around and indicated that the vetoed projects could return … and soon. At the time, the governor told reporters that he wasn’t opposed to the vetoed projects, but that they just could not be approved this year.
Since many of these projects were scheduled for the second year of Kentucky’s two-year budget cycle, expect Fletcher and his fellow big spenders in the General Assembly to push state spending even higher by insisting on restoring funding for these projects. With the governor seeking another term in 2007, lawmakers likely will press the advantage by asking for more spending in their districts.
Don't just expect the big spenders in Frankfort to double down with your dollars, bank on it.
