(part II link here)
There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding around part II of this series. I would like to take a moment to clear up a few things.
What would have gotten done before 9/11? Marriage tax penalty relief. That's it.
Realistically speaking, I do not honestly think the Congress would buy off on my other proposals. I doubt they would even agree to double their salaries in exchange for an end to earmarking.
If you look closely at my proposals, a lot of them revolve around the way Congress does business. Campaign financing and earmarking are two of the primary ways our legislators ensure their own re-election. If the purpose of government is to re-elect legislators, then it is a tremendous system. Personally, I think it stinks.
Prior to 9/11, Congress will undoubtedly forward some pork-stuffed legislation to me. It will get vetoed. I will then hold a press conference where I will highlight the ridiculous ways our legislators were attempting to rob the national treasury. I will also highlight who those legislators are BY NAME. I suspect I will have plenty of legislators on both sides of the aisle quite angry with me.
Congress will utterly despise me. However, I will throw them a bone. I will call in the Congressional leaders of both parties and tell them if they remove the pork, I will sign it. If they cannot get it passed without the pork, it does not deserve to be passed. With split houses, they may have trouble overriding the veto. It is risky, but I think I can win the first round of this battle.
A lot of you seem to be under the impression I will be taking my proposals and executing them by Executive Order. That is NOT true. I am showing you what I am proposing to Congress. If Congress takes the proposal and passes it, THAT is when it would become law.
For the sake of this scenario, I assume Congress will be antagonistic.