<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why The Line-Item Veto Won&#8217;t Work</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/21/why-the-line-item-veto-wont-work/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/21/why-the-line-item-veto-wont-work/</link>
	<description>Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 18:49:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff Molby</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/21/why-the-line-item-veto-wont-work/#comment-40980</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Molby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Oct 2007 16:46:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/21/why-the-line-item-veto-wont-work/#comment-40980</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;blockquote&gt;It adds weight to my growing suspicion that the central failure of our political system is the inability of Congress to address our problems forthrightly.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
It adds weight to my growing suspicion that the central failure of our political system is the inability of the public to realize that a national congress is inherently unable to address our problems forthrightly. 

I propose we pass the following amendment:
&lt;blockquote&gt;The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.&lt;/blockquote&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>It adds weight to my growing suspicion that the central failure of our political system is the inability of Congress to address our problems forthrightly.</p></blockquote>
<p>It adds weight to my growing suspicion that the central failure of our political system is the inability of the public to realize that a national congress is inherently unable to address our problems forthrightly. </p>
<p>I propose we pass the following amendment:</p>
<blockquote><p>The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chepe Noyon</title>
		<link>http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/21/why-the-line-item-veto-wont-work/#comment-40973</link>
		<dc:creator>Chepe Noyon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Oct 2007 15:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/10/21/why-the-line-item-veto-wont-work/#comment-40973</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hmm, Will makes an excellent point. It adds weight to my growing suspicion that the central failure of our political system is the inability of Congress to address our problems forthrightly. I&#039;m still mulling over the precise nature of the problem, but I&#039;m sure it has something to do with the role of money in politics, and probably something to do with the increasing power of the national parties. 

At another blog I learned of an interesting concept for elections: approval voting. In this scheme, each voter can vote for as many candidates as he wishes; the winner is the candidate with the most votes. The result is that you aren&#039;t forced to choose between the lesser of two evil extremes; the centrist candidate will always win. Now, we could argue that centrists aren&#039;t desirable, but I think you&#039;d agree that they&#039;re a damn sight better than George W. Bush if you&#039;re a liberal and Hillary Clinton if you&#039;re a conservative. It might also put an end to negative campaigning. What&#039;s the point of smearing another candidate if in the process you end up with some of the mud on yourself?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm, Will makes an excellent point. It adds weight to my growing suspicion that the central failure of our political system is the inability of Congress to address our problems forthrightly. I&#8217;m still mulling over the precise nature of the problem, but I&#8217;m sure it has something to do with the role of money in politics, and probably something to do with the increasing power of the national parties. </p>
<p>At another blog I learned of an interesting concept for elections: approval voting. In this scheme, each voter can vote for as many candidates as he wishes; the winner is the candidate with the most votes. The result is that you aren&#8217;t forced to choose between the lesser of two evil extremes; the centrist candidate will always win. Now, we could argue that centrists aren&#8217;t desirable, but I think you&#8217;d agree that they&#8217;re a damn sight better than George W. Bush if you&#8217;re a liberal and Hillary Clinton if you&#8217;re a conservative. It might also put an end to negative campaigning. What&#8217;s the point of smearing another candidate if in the process you end up with some of the mud on yourself?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
