Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-11-01
Tho Discriminating Veto.

ITO WV
There IL much in q name. Discrimi-
mating veto" is a taking phrase, 1t ini-
plies that there Is such thing as care
less exercise OF the veto power. and that
this carclcssness in the performances OF an
Official duty cannot or at least does not
exist where the Chief Executive OF State
possesses the power TO veto separate items
in IN appropriation bill. This subject
comes up Just now for discussion in New
York. where the discriminating veto has
for come years been constitutional pro-
vision. because the people OF Maryland
are TO vote next, Tuesday upon the ques-
ton OF comforting upon their Governor.the
power of which we speak.
We have for years had but one opinion
as to the discriminating veto. In the first
place, it invites the carelossness which Its
advocates say 1t prevents. We need not
say much on this point. In the second
place, it offers premium for ignorance.
The Governor who knowsleast about the
needs Of his State. and the President who
knows least about tho needs OF the United
States. will be tho first to call TO his aid
the discriminating veto. Arbana ana
Phaphar are oil tho rivers he Is acquainted
with. In fact this power is Objectionable
In proportion to the wealth and popula-
ton and diversified interests of the several
States. II might be well to invest the
Governor of Rhode Island, or any other
small State with this power. II might be
safe TO confer il upon the mayors OF small
cities even. But it is q power when
should never be conferred upon the Gov
ernor OF large State or the Mayor OF o
large city.
II has long, If not always, been held in
this country that the executive, Ieglsla'
tive. and judicial departments OF the Fed
eral Government as well rs Of the several
State governments should be kept separate
and apart. To confer upon the President
of the United States. OF the Governor OF a
State, tho power to veto such items as he
disapproyes in an appropriation bill, and
TO convert into law such items as he APP
proves. IS to deposit one third OF the legis-
latiye power of the State or the United
States in that executive. The veto power
"pure and simple" as the French phrase
reads. is less Objectionable. This makes
the President or Governor take the respon-
sbility Of vetoing the entire bill or con-
yerting the whole of it into law,
and leaves to Congress its full
power in the premises. The southern
States would under the operation OF the
discriminating veto in the hands OF Re
publican President never know what 1t
YVES 10 have river improved. Observe
the profound ignorance which the New
York papers manifest in regard to the size
and Importance of the southern rivers
whenever a river-nnd-harbor bill is pend
ing, and you will be able to guess how
MANY southern rivers would ever receive
favorable consideration at the hands of a
New York President. Why, river-and-
harbor bill is never up for consideration
in Congress that the New York papers do
NOT call upon the President to veto 1T, or
upon the two houses of Congress to give
New York millions of dollars and the
southern States and cities nothing or next
TO nothing.
But we shall be told that legislative log
rolling would be prevented by the dis
eliminating veto. We reply that we would
rather retain the log-rolling than clothe
the President with the power to disregard
the wishes of Congress and set up law
making department Of his own. GIVE
HARRISON the discriminating veto. and the
James river and other VIrginiarivers would
receive little consideration from HIM:
GEORGE WISE is now the representative OF
his people, and when he approaches the
President of the United States approaches
him as his peer. He has no favors to ask
except such as may be properly asked.
Rut confer upon the President the
discriminating veto, and our representative
will have first to work himself half TO
death to get his river appropriations.
through tho two houses Of Congress, and
then to dance attendance upon the Presi-
dent at the White House, where, hat IN
hand. and bowlng like an Oriental official
he will have to implore the President not
10 veto his items in the appropriation bills
The President will look at one OF our big
rivers for instance. and seeing how short II
is will set it down as noriver at all, though
it may really be an arm OF the sea.
We need not pursue the subject further
The discriminating veto has, upon full
consideration nothing to recommend 1t te
| favor. If we adopt 1t. we shall soon re-
pent of the folly OF having done so.