Which of the following is the head of executive branch of government can veto specific items of a bill? PLZ?
399524
The US president can't under the US Constitution. It lacks the power for a so-called line item veto. A 1996 law allowing for such a veto was struck down.\n\nHowever, most state constitutions provide for such a veto with the exception of  Indiana, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Vermont. If you live in the above seven states, it is 4. If you don't it is 2.
902722
A lot of vetoes from George W. Bush...he will pop his veto cherry for sure!
1009835
Answer to subquestion 1. Yes\nAnswer to subquestion 2. No.  The executive branch cannot assume powers that are not vested in it except by Congressional authority and cannot assume powers that Congress does not have within the Constitution.  Anything that the president does is subject to review by the Judicial Branch and can be found to be unconstitutional.  Presidents can only use powers granted by Congress.\n\nMy answer to your overall question:  Vote out the current career politicians and replace them with regular Americans like you and me.  That's what the Constitution was set up for.  Representation by the people in the House, and representation of the states in the Senate.  There should be no federal government except to the extent necessary to provide for basic needs of the people and protection from our enemies.  States should actually be in control of the direction of the "ship" and held in check by the appointed representatives of the people.  Don't vote for a Democrat or a Republican.  Vote for a candidate that represents what you believe is in the best interest of the country, not the best interest of a social group, an economic group, or any other wannabe majority.  Hell, vote for me!  I'm a Libertarian.
214975
Clinton did something (with a Republican Congress, mind you) that Bush will never be able to do - balance a budget. Bush has NEVER vetoes a single spending bill that has come across his desk. Dems may be tax-and-spend, but Republicans are cut taxes-and-spend even more. Which is worse? Gotta go with Clinton on this one. He has ineffectual as a Commander-in-Chief but he wasn't afraid to break out the red veto stamp when it was needed.
498589
Our current president claims "executive privelege" over everything.  He has NOT ONCE excercised his veto power, the first president in history to never veto a single tiny bill from Congress.  His answer is to instead is to sign a congressional bill into law and then immediately write a signing statement saying how the law does not apply to him, or simply issue an executive order reversing whatever the bill said when it doesn't suit him.  If that isn't unchecked power, I don't know what is.  His cronies have also been instrumental in passing laws dismantling the bill of rights, it is just now starting that federal judges are getting such cases challenged, but the media isn't reporting the rulings (Scalia totally grilled the Bush administration, the very people that appointed him).
383713
Yes indeed. "Legislative" means the ones who actually pass the laws ("legis" -- from the Latin for law), while "Executive" means the ones who execute (enforce) them, and "judicial" means the ones who judge them.  So Congress (the House of Representatives) and the Senate are both part of the legislative branch.
350901
Great question.  Nearly every role requires the president to share power with Congress.  As Chief Executive, the budgets of the departments are controlled by Congress and the department heads confirmed by Senate votes.  As chief diplomat, all treaties must be ratified by the Senate.  As appointer of the federal judiciary, his or her picks must be ratified by the Senate.  As Commander in Chief, it is Congress that declares war.  Having said all that, the key role in which the most leeway will be granted is as commander in chief.
971724
Congress has the mandate in law to impeach officials.\nJustices of the Supreme Court serves until 65 years old.\nCongress has the power to amend and repel national laws.\nThere are at least 15 Supreme Court Justices in most countries.\nThe Legislature can veto the act of the President by 2/3 votes.\nThe Supreme Court has the power to review all laws & treaties.\nThe Judicial Bar Council approves the appointment of judges.\nThe President approves all treaties with other countries.
936882
While the Democrats control the House without question, the Senate is still undecided. Either way the president is now a lame duck. However, the label also applies to Democrats at this point. The reason is because the president can veto any legislation they attempt to pass. The conclusion here is don't count on anything substantive happening in government for the next 2 years unless the Democrats truly embrace bi-partisan legislation efforts.
647852
the executive branch consists of the president, vice president, and the cabinet.\n\nthe presidents "controls foreign affairs and domestic power, appoints many officials, grants pardons and reprieves, is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, prepares the budget for the nation, and is the legislative leader for the party in power."\n\nthe VP is the head of the senate, "takes any other duties assigned by the president," and is next in line to replace the president.\n\nthe cabinet are "15 department officials appointed by the president to aid in the running of our country"
121591
Basically, the government can do whatever it wants except what is explicitly forbidden by the constitution. And even then, they can ratify the constitution. Government also gets away with doing things if nobody says anything about it and the Supreme Court doesn't notice or is willing to rule in their favor.\n\nBut if you're looking for an answer about which branch has what powers, congress makes laws, the supreme court ensures laws and acts of government are constitutional, and the president has the power to act in an emergency and veto potential laws he or potentially she disagrees with.\n\nIn introductory political science courses they say the president enforces laws, but I think that doesn't hold up in reality. When was the last time you saw the president enforce anything?
539232
So Fine is a moron.  Ignore her idiotic answer.\n\nHere is the right answer:\n\n1.  Congress writes the laws but cannot pass them nor determine their Constitutionality.\n\n2.  The President signs the laws but cannot write them nor determine their constitutionality.\n\n3.  The Supreme Court determines the laws constitutionality but cannot write them nor sign them\n\n\nEnd of story.
896386
The President has a limited period of time after a bill is passed by both the House and Senate to either sign or veto it.  If that time expires after the current session of Congress ends and he does not sign it, then it cannot become law but he does not have to use his veto power.
907997
He is the president still. He has a right to veto anything he does not agree with or if he feels it is not in the best interest of America.
293242
1) Appointment for life as chosen by the president. That's a balance of powers, how?? Oh, and for the immediate response of "congress can veto" - yes, they can, but if there's just one year where the congress is swayed one way or the other, that "for life" part affects the next 30 years or so. \n2) They have the final word. No one gets to veto them once they make up their mind. Again, not too much balance there.
778508
the president is getting a whole box full of veto stamps . he wont even consider what is sent his way just veto veto veto. whats this a cure for cancer...veto...whats this a soloutin to world hunger..VETO  whats this healthcare for vets and senior citizens  VETO. ...ECT ECT ECT
1176385
OK, separation of powers is different from the checks and balances.\n\nThe separation of powers makes it clear that only the courts can interpret the constitution and whether it allows for or a law or executive order or not.  It makes it clear that only the president can issue executive orders (ie going to war etc.) and finally that only the legislature shall pass laws. ( I know the last two seem to cross over with the presidential veto and the fact that some laws are proposed by the white house... but it the separation is there.)\n\nThe checks and balances is that no one branch has supreme power and that each can and will be "checked" by the others.  The courts can overturn a law or executive order.  The president can veto a law and appoints the bench. And the legislature can overturn a veto and can amend the constitution to change the issue before the bench.\n\nI don't think either superseded either, they are both intertwined.  I do not think though that anyone should be monitoring the branches (except for the public).  If judges were to watch the pres, then the pres would have the right to watch judges and congress and congress would have the right to watch the judges etc.)\nWhat we need to do is hold our representative officials responsible for their actions and make sure that the best candidates are put forth on ballots.