Subscribe to Breaking NewsRuby-Sachs: Abuse of Power in Vermont
Vermont Governor Jim Douglas
Today, the Vermont House is debating a same-sex marriage bill that is certain to garner more than 50% support. The problem is that the House needs 100 votes to override a gubernatorial veto promised by Republican Governor Jim Douglas.
Vetoes, a chance for Governor’s to curb excessive spending, are an important tool to be used rarely. For many Governors, line-item vetoes may provide an opportunity to pare down the overall budget demands of a bill while still approving the overall intention of the elected representatives.
A few Governors are not given a line-item veto right. Those Governors may only reject bills altogether. Vermont is one of the states that only permits a blunt veto of an entire bill.
The basic veto power– a broad stroke that overrides the will of hundreds of elected representatives – must be used sparingly. It undermines the fabric of a democratic society. It undermines the effectiveness of the legislative process and it takes power from the entire legislative branch. Will of the people becomes the whim of one.
Still, Governor Douglas insists on vetoing the same-sex marriage bill because he, “believe[s] marriage has always been and ought to remain the union of a man and a woman.”
The majority of elected representatives in Vermont disagree with this personal belief. Douglas would be using his veto power to do nothing more than substitute his own preference for the will of the residents of the entire State.
In the era of Bush the younger, vetoes became an accepted practice. The harm they cause, however, hasn’t changed just because the President vetoes more often.
Douglas’s intention to veto a bill that does nothing to threaten the budget of Vermont and is supported by the majority of elected representatives is an abuse of the powers of his office. All Vermont residents, whether for or against same-sex marriage, should be outraged at their Governor’s behavior.
He may not be abusing his power, but it seems to me he’s a very poor politician for letting his personal animosity – or maybe it’s opportunism – override sensible decision making and effective governance. I hope this term is his last.
The veto is his prerogative, but he should use it sparingly and with good reason.
Why not remove the governor’s power to veto expansion of civil rights by amending the constitution of Vermont?
I disagree. The Governor has a right to veto any bill passed by the legislature. It’s not an abuse of power, it IS his power as governor. The executive branch provides a check on the legislative branch in this manner. In turn, the legislative branch checks the executive branch by being allowed to over-ride the veto.
While I strongly believe he is making the wrong decision, he has every right to make this decision.
My guess is that they will, barely, get enough override votes. Douglas even thinks so, which makes his decision to veto the bill even more bizarre. If he thinks the vote is such a waste of time, but knows the legislature will probably override a veto, then why doesn’t he just not sign the bill, letting it become law? To whom is he trying to make a point?
Douglas is a twit. I hope there will be enough votes to override his veto. However, it is absurd to describe his veto as an “abuse of power.” The veto comes with the governorship. The way to get back at him is to recall him or at least to vote against him when he runs for reelection.
This is by far the more ignorant and downright ignorant article I have ever read. Please Emma Ruby-Sachs learn how to read history before jumping to conclusions which are based entirely on your point of view instead of facts. I doubt very much you’d be making the same arguement if say Bill Clinton was threatening to veto Doma back in the 90’s.
Your argument about the undemocratic nature of overturning the will of the people sounds fine, for this case in Vermont, but would you want the same argument applied to the Prop 8 vote in California?
I think it’s good for these asses to show their asses. The crazier this governor acts, the more it focuses the public on how ridiculous anti-gay sentiment is, and how mean and abusive the gay-haters are. I would rather him let the law go into effect. Barring that, please, let him be the biggest turd he can be.
This veto is a violation of state/religion separation. His reasons are religious. Period. Clearly unconstitutional.
I am a 100% for gay marriage but by saying the governor threatening a veto is stretching his powers is just stupid. He can express his opinion on anything. He doesn’t have to reserve judgement. Even the President does this.
Guy in SF – the President and governors routinely use the threat of a veto to discourage legislatures from proceeding in ways they don’t work. It’s not an abuse of power.
The tactic can irritate legislators and I hope it works that way in VT to get us enough votes to override, because if it doesn’t, gay marriage is dead in VT until they elect a Democratic governor.
It’s an abuse of power for the Governor to announce he will veto legislation, prior to the Legislature completing their debate and vote.
Interesting that some Legislatures who plan to vote against same-sex marriage have indicated they would switch their vote to override a gubernatorial veto, because he interfered with the legislative process.
He’s not abusing his power. He’s the executive and executives have veto power. However, he IS giving an excellent example of why no Republican should ever be elected to any office anywhere, much less to the governorship of a state.
schulteraffe: Yeah this is what I thought the House has to pass it not the Senate. The Senate already passed it 26-4. Plus the Vermont Senate has only 30 members, so it can’t be the Senate.
Sorry, but I think you are off the mark, here. First off, it is not the Senate that is voting, they already approved the measure with a veto proof majority. It is the House of Representatives that is voting.
And as far as abuse of powers go, there is no basis for the proposition that the veto power pertains only to spending bills. Executive vetos have always been intended as fully part of the checks and balance system on all issues.
For the record, my point is entirely related only to what I perceive as a mistatement of governmental separation of powers. I think Governor Douglas is a twit and am very pleased to live in MA where I can be happily married to another man.