The Un-Veto

As part of her non-signing of the budget bill last week (it goes into effect late today) Gov. Jodi Rell said she would veto $8 million in spending that she referred to as “pork.”

Turns out that pork will stand after all. Oink!

Apparently there is the possibility of a court fight, and Gov. Rell doesn’t really want to bother with that. So the budget will pass in its entirety.

4 responses to “The Un-Veto

  1. For the curious, here’s the section of the state constitution that Rell is having difficulty interpreting:

    SEC. 16. The governor shall have power to disapprove of any item or items of any bill making appropriations of money embracing distinct items while at the same time approving the remainder of the bill, and the part or parts of the bill so approved shall become effective and the item or items of appropriations so disapproved shall not take effect unless the same are separately reconsidered and repassed in accordance with the rules and limitations prescribed for the passage of bills over the executive veto. In all cases in which the governor shall exercise the right of disapproval hereby conferred he shall append to the bill at the time of signing it a statement of the item or items disapproved, together with his reasons for such disapproval, and transmit the bill and such appended statement to the secretary of the state. If the general assembly be then in session he shall forthwith cause a copy of such statement to be delivered to the house in which the bill originated for reconsideration of the disapproved items in conformity with the rules prescribed for legislative action in respect to bills which have received executive disapproval.

    Seems pretty straightforward to me. To use the line-item veto power, the Governor must sign the rest of the bill. I guess the Governor’s political capital is worth more than $8 million of taxpayer money.

  2. Wow, it’s pretty embarrassing that the governor of our state hasn’t even read our state’s own constitution.

    That section of the constitution is unambiguous and straightforward. I would seriously like to hear how Rell disagrees with Blumenthal’s reading of the constitution.

    I really do want to know the answer to that. If there are any reporters reading this, can you please ask Rell how she is somehow interpreting the constitution differently? In very easy to understand English, the state constitution says that a governor has to sign a bill if he/she going to use a line item veto. I would like to hear how she is somehow reading that easy to understand language differently.

  3. My guess is she already knew she couldn’t exercise a line item veto without signing it. She certainly put the spotlight on the extra spending the Democrats put in the bill with her statement.

    Larry Cafero is right, she still should have vetoed the whole bill.

  4. Cool!

    $8 million worth of goodies to brag about in campaign mailers next year.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s