Have you ever heard of a pocket veto? It's a little-known technique that can be used by decision-makers to kill a proposal without taking any action. Essentially, if a decision-maker doesn't sign or veto a bill within a certain timeframe, it is automatically vetoed. This technique can be a powerful tool in the hands of those who want to block legislation or initiatives without taking a public stance on the issue.
The pocket veto has been used in various contexts, from local town government to the White House. In Wisconsin, for example, the pocket veto has been used to scuttle projects without any transparency. According to a news article from March 18, 2023, the Town of Grand Chute public works director Katie Schwartz was frustrated by the lack of transparency around pocket vetoes, saying, "There's no transparency."
At the federal level, presidents have used the pocket veto to block legislation without having to publicly veto it. For example, former President George W. Bush used the pocket veto more than a year into his presidency to kill a bill that would have expanded the State Children's Health Insurance Program. The bill had passed with bipartisan support in both the House and Senate, but Bush vetoed it using the pocket veto, which didn't require him to explain his reasoning or take a public stance on the issue.
The pocket veto can also be used in the context of national security. According to a news article from October 2021, the FBI has the power of a pocket veto when it comes to congressional requests for documents related to national security. As former FBI special agent Frank Montoya Jr. explained, "That veto power can be exercised by simply not making the request, or by a pocket veto where the investigating agency could simply not respond."
In the context of state-level politics, the pocket veto can be used by governors to block legislation without having to publicly veto it. For example, in New Mexico, bills that are not acted upon by a certain deadline are automatically "pocket vetoed" and no explanation is required. Last year, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham used the pocket veto five times, including one veto of a measure that would have boosted the pay of New Mexico's legislators.
Michelle Lujan Grisham is not alone in her use of the pocket veto. In fact, many governors have used this technique to kill legislation without having to take a public stance on the issue. In New Mexico, Lujan Grisham has until April 7 to veto or pocket veto legislation passed in the most recent session. If she takes no action, the bill will die in what's called a "pocket veto."
While the pocket veto can be a useful tool for decision-makers, it is not without controversy. Critics argue that it is undemocratic and lacks transparency, as decision-makers can use it to kill proposals without having to explain their reasoning or take a public stance on the issue. Supporters, on the other hand, argue that it is a necessary tool for decision-makers who want to block legislation without being forced to take a public stance on every issue.
In conclusion, the pocket veto is a powerful tool that can be used by decision-makers to kill proposals without taking any action. It has been used in various contexts, from local town government to the White House, and can be a controversial topic. While some argue that it is undemocratic and lacks transparency, others see it as a necessary tool for decision-makers who want to block legislation without having to take a public stance on every issue. Regardless of one's stance on the issue, it is important to understand the concept of the pocket veto and its implications in various contexts.
