politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Do you think trump is aware that he can't stonewall that bill for very long?
Source
So the reason they're mad is that if they want it to pass they'll have to stay in Washington for the next 10 days and not go back on vacation? That tracks.
He thinks Congress will capitulate to him within that 10-day period.
Or, He and his toady chorus are completely unaware of the ten day rule
Anyone else confident they won’t?
More like 'cautiously optimistic'. This is Congress we're talking about.
and there hasn't been a pocket veto since gwb.
If they veto it, or pocket veto it by ignoring it, it takes a larger majority to pass it. I think you are mistaken here.
No, they're right. Trump can't stonewall because that exact clause in the Constitution takes the "ignores it" option off the table.
Read OP's quote again:
"They" don't veto anything. The president vetoes. Only him. And even then he either signs it and it is approved, or he returns it to Congress and it is rejected (vetoed), one or the other, within ten days.
That's it. There are no other options, because the clause quoted takes any other option away.
If the president simply does nothing it becomes law, "in like Manner as if he had signed it."
A pocket veto is when the president does not sign it within the ten-day period AND cannot return the bill to Congress because Congress is no longer in session or adjourns within that ten day period.
So how a pocket veto works depends entirely on Congress being in session or not. "They" don't do anything else. The bill now either gets signed or it fails, just like any other bill.
If a bill fails because it is successfully pocket vetoed by Congress' absence during its attempted return, they just leave it as failed and it dies, or they reintroduce it as a normal bill, requiring a normal number of signatures, and again the executive will simply sign it or return it.
So I have no idea where you're getting that more than a simple majority is required to pass a reintroduced bill after a pocket veto, or why this bill would require anything different than usual. If a new bill is reintroduced because this one fails, it will be voted on in the same manner that this one was.