mrstickball said:
I would have thought the same thing would happen in Gary Johnson's New Mexico where 2/3rds of the legislature was Democrat, so they already had a built-in majority against him. Yes, there would be a few over-rides. But he could use the veto to at least achieve a modicum of things to be done. More importantly, he could force both sides to come to the table and actually write a budget, which would then (hopefully) get both sides to agree on some cuts. |
There's a big difference between a state government and the federal government. Most state governments cannot legally operate with a budget deficit, so the legislators themselves have a legal obligation to work together to create a balanced budget, or raise taxes. The federal government however, can run up a deficite as we all know. Both parties are guilty of doing it. Budgets rarely get vetoed at the federal level, this is mostly due to the fact that getting a budget passed is actually a lot of work. Where vetos usually happen are on appropriations and other spending bills.
Also, in order to participate in the debates, a candidate has to have garnered I believe 10% of the vote.








