The problems with line item vetos is that a President would most likely not have the time or inclination to actually use it to deal with the pork, but he would use it to effectively have final edit privileges on all laws, at which point, he is both the Legislative and Executive branches at once.
I think an easier solution is to impose a maximum length on non-budget bills and make them open for public review for a minimum of 90 days after final edit and before voting. Also enforce a separation in bills. Those that contain anything that involve appropriations must not include unrelated appropriations. That way you don't have missile programs sneaking into farm bills, steel subsidies sneaking into tax reforms, and bridges sneaking into education acts.
> The problems with line item vetos is that a President would most likely not have the time or inclination to actually use it to deal with the pork, but he would use it to effectively have final edit privileges on all laws, at which point, he is both the Legislative and Executive branches at once.
Has that happened in the states that have line item veto? If not, why would it be different at the federal level? If so, could some tweaks fix the problem?
Those all sound great. If you're a libertarian and want to get depressed, real the Cato Handbook for Congress. It's a list a mile long of excellent ideas that are unlikely to happen.
Anything else would just add layers on top of a convoluted system.
McCain-Feingold is a perfect example of a piece of legislation that did nothing in response to the money in politics.
As long as there is $3T for the federal government to spend, there will be business trying to get a piece of it.
I love Lessig, but I'm amazed he can't see the elephant in the room.