Line-item veto

A line-item veto allows an executive to cancel specific parts of a bill, usually spending items, without rejecting the whole measure. Most U.S. governors have some version of it. The president does not: the Constitution requires the president to accept or reject a bill in its entirety.

Congress tried to grant it by statute in the Line Item Veto Act of 1996, which allowed the president to cancel certain spending and tax benefits. In Clinton v. City of New York (1998), the Supreme Court held 6-3 that the law violated the Presentment Clause, because it let the president amend duly enacted statutes by himself. After that decision, proposals have shifted toward modified versions, such as an expedited rescission process in which Congress must vote on the president's proposed cuts.

Supporters, often fiscal conservatives, say the power would help reduce waste and cut earmarks, as governors already do. Critics say it would shift too much power over spending from Congress to the president and could be used to punish opponents. The related fight over impoundment concerns whether a president can decline to spend money Congress appropriated. The veto remains the president's only formal tool.