The 4-letter word Trump must learn to love



It’s a four-letter word. It’s so powerful that our Founders had to weaken its authority from the original design, yet it remains rarely challenged. It’s the president’s most powerful leverage tool: the veto. If Trump wants to succeed in shrinking government where he failed in his first term, he must make this pen his constant companion — and let everyone in Congress know he’s ready to use it.

While a president doesn’t pass legislation or craft the actual budget signed into law, he controls all must-pass legislation by wielding the veto. He can block any budget or program reauthorization bill that lacks spending cuts and structural reforms. Since Reagan left office, only seven presidential vetoes have been successfully overridden. It’s rare for a critical number of a president’s own party — especially if they hold the majority — to defy their leader. That’s where Trump’s leverage lies and why the veto pen matters more than any Cabinet position.

Trump can simply make it clear that any reauthorization or appropriation bill lacking sufficient spending cuts and reforms will be vetoed.

Trump’s veto pen saw little action during his first administration, contributing to runaway spending. In fact, he used his veto pen less frequently than any president in the past 100 years. None of his 10 vetoes came in his first two years, when Republicans controlled Congress. This points to the problem and offers a framework for a more effective term.

The history behind the veto

If we had asked the framers of the Constitution, they would likely have admitted that their master plan might unravel for various reasons. However, they probably didn’t foresee the presidential veto pen becoming a weak tool for achieving Madison’s goal of “ambition ... made to counteract ambition,” meant to balance Congress' strong power.

Before proposing the veto override balance, the Founders worried that giving the president an absolute veto could shift too much power to the executive branch. During the June 4, 1787, debate, James Wilson and Alexander Hamilton proposed a veto power, but Benjamin Franklin argued that governors with veto power often used it for extortion. “No good law whatever could be passed without a private bargain with him,” Franklin complained. Roger Sherman also warned against “enabling any one man to stop the will of the whole,” doubting that “any one man could be found so far above all the rest in wisdom.”

The Convention debated the need for a veto override at length. Initially, framers passed a motion to set the override threshold at three-fourths of both houses of Congress. However, after Roger Sherman, Charles Pinckney, Hugh Williamson, and Elbridge Gerry raised concerns that this high threshold could grant too much power to the president and a small number of allies, the delegates agreed on a two-thirds threshold. They also rejected Madison’s proposal for a “council of revision,” which would have placed the veto in the hands of a joint council of the president and Supreme Court justices, choosing instead to vest this power solely in the president.

The Founders clearly saw the presidential veto as a potent tool, and many feared its abuse. They never anticipated that a president might be reluctant to use it.

Trump’s mandate — and leverage

Let’s be honest: Getting Trump’s priorities through the legislative process will be tedious without leveraging must-pass bills against a veto threat. Republicans will hold a slim three-seat majority in the House, built largely on liberal Republicans from California and New York.

Transformational policies, such as reducing legal immigration, downsizing government programs, overturning the vaccine liability shield, and ending birthright citizenship, would struggle to pass the House. Each targeted program has a constituency of Republicans likely to join Democrats in opposing cuts.

And that’s before facing the Senate, which is filled with RINOs who make House Republicans look like the Founding Fathers. Even on issues that unite Republicans, they’ll fall far short of the 60 votes needed to break a Democratic filibuster.

This is where “must-pass” bills come in. There will be a budget bill in the spring to complete this year’s appropriations and another next fall for fiscal year 2025. A debt ceiling bill will likely come up in late spring. The annual budget reconciliation bill, which can bypass the filibuster for budgetary items, offers a major opportunity. Additionally, an array of reauthorization bills will expire during Trump’s term.

Trump can simply make it clear that any reauthorization or appropriation bill lacking sufficient spending cuts and reforms will be vetoed. That leverage should be wielded and communicated early in the process. During the June 4, 1787, debate over the president’s check on Congress, James Wilson predicted the veto’s power would ensure it was “seldom” used, not because of its weakness but because Congress would avoid passing laws members knew the president would veto.

Benjamin Franklin disdained the veto power, seeing it as a form of extortion. Nevertheless, that’s the power a president holds. If Trump wields the veto pen, the success or failure of his two terms may hinge on this four-letter word that the Founders, with much trepidation, vested in one man.

‘Schoolhouse Rock’ Forgot To Teach Kids About The Administrative State

It’s a wonderful introduction to our system of government. But for all the video gets right, there’s an anomaly at its core.

Youngkin Vetoes ‘Disastrous’ Bill Expanding Ranked-Choice Voting In Virginia

'A heightened risk of mistakenly erroneous ballot submissions raises concerns about disenfranchisement and an increased lack of voter confidence in election results.'

Youngkin Vetoes Democrats’ Attempt To Force Virginia Back Into Leftist-Linked Voter Roll ‘Maintenance’ Group

Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed Democrat legislation on Friday that sought to force Virginia into rejoining the leftist-linked ERIC.

'A slap in the face': Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoes bill that would allow police to arrest illegal aliens



Arizona is beleaguered by illegal aliens and is now home to the number-one national hot spot for illegal border crossings. U.S. Customs and Border Protection data indicates migrant encounters in the Tucson sector were up 182.4% in the first four months of fiscal year 2024 over the same period last year, dwarfing the counts of other areas along the southern border.

Keen to tackle this problem, Republicans in the Arizona legislature passed Arizona Border Invasion Act, SB 1231, last month. The bill, greatly similar to the one ratified by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott in December and recently permitted by a federal appeals court to go into effect, would make illegal border crossing a state crime and empower state and local police to arrest foreign nationals who steal into the Grand Canyon State.

By way of veto, Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs killed this effort to clamp down on illegal immigration on Monday.

"This bill does not secure our border, will be harmful for communities and businesses in our state, and burdensome for law enforcement personnel and the state judicial system," Hobbs wrote in a letter to Senate President Warren Petersen. "Further, this bill presents significant constitutional concerns and would be certain to mire the State in costly and protracted litigation."

State Sen. Janae Shamp (R), the bill's sponsor, blasted Hobbs over her veto, saying, "Democrats are choosing to live in an alternate reality that ignores the facts. The facts are that illegal immigrants are crossing the border at a rate our state and our country cannot sustain. The facts are that border-related crimes are at an all-time high in our communities and are no longer safe."

"Our governor proudly vetoed the Arizona Border Invasion Act that would have given our law enforcement the tools to keep citizens like Laken [Riley] safe and alive," continued Shamp.

Contrary to Hobbs' suggestion that SB 1231 would have burdened law enforcement, Shamp underscored that the Arizona Sheriff’s Association "unanimously supported this bill."

"The legislature did its job to protect our citizens but Governor Hobbs failed to do hers. This veto is a slap in the face to our law enforcement, to victims of border-related crimes, and everyone else who will inevitably feel the wrath of this border invasion in one way or another," added Shamp.

Republican state Rep. Steve Montenegro, who sponsored a mirror bill of the legislation, suggested that Hobbs had turned her back on Arizonans and demonstrated with her veto that she's "siding w/Washington DC instead of Arizona families."

Hobbs' veto was alternatively celebrated by leftist and pro-migrant groups.

The activist group Living United for Change in Arizona called the legislature's February passage of the bill "undemocratic," then claimed it was "thrilled" over Hobbs' unilateral action.

"Today we thank Governor Hobbs for striking a major blow to Arizona Republicans' attempt to bring in a new era of anti-immigrant hate and legalized racial profiling to our state," LUCHA executive director Alejandra Gomez said in a statement. "Today is a reflection of the power of democracy and the power of people when they come together to fight against racism, hate, and just plain bad policy."

Under SB 1231, illegal entry would have been classified as a class 1 misdemeanor. If the illegal alien was previously convicted of illegal entry, they would be charged under the vetoed bill as a class 6 felony. The bill would have simplified matters for courts to send foreign nationals packing.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Ohio GOP successfully bans child sex-change mutilations and men from women's sports after overriding Gov. DeWine's veto



Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine vetoed legislation last month that promised to save children in the state from sex-change mutilations and keep men out of women's sports. Unsatisfied with the governor's substitutive executive order and unwilling to give him the last word, Republican lawmakers have worked to surmount DeWine's veto.

Lawmakers in the Ohio House successfully voted on Jan. 10 to override DeWine's veto. On Wednesday, Republicans in the Senate followed suit, passing the law in a landslide 24-8 vote. They did so without the support of Republican state Sen. Nathan Manning, whose term ends in 2026.

Ohio has, as a result, joined over 20 other states that protect children from confusion-affirming medical interventions.

The law

HB 68 contains both the Saving Adolescents from Experimentation Act and the Save Women's Sports Act.

Like DeWine's Executive Order 2024-01D, the SAFE Act bars physicians from performing sex-change surgeries on minors; however, it goes much farther to protect children.

The law prohibits prescribing minors ruinous cross-sex hormones or puberty blockers "for the purpose of assisting the minor individual with gender transition" as well as aiding or abetting in such mutilations and prescriptions.

Blaze News previously noted that the SAFE Act also bars courts from denying or limiting parents' rights and responsibilities or parenting time based on their decision to:

  • "refer to and raise the child in a manner consistent with the child's biological sex";
  • "decline to consent to the child receiving gender transition services"; or
  • "decline to consent to the child receiving counseling or other mental health services for the purpose of affirming the child's perception of the child's gender or sex, if the child's perception is inconsistent with the child's biological sex."

The Save Women's Sports Act goes one step farther in countering the material and structural impact of social constructivism, requiring that interscholastic athletic teams be properly sex-segregated unless otherwise qualified as co-ed.

The Associated Press indicated the law is expected to take effect in roughly 90 days.

Children who went under the knife or were subjected to sterilizing drugs before the law could protect them will be permitted to continue their treatment. Hermaphrodites have also been granted exceptions.

Common sense

"The Ohio Senate deserves to be commended today for its commitment to protecting women and children by overriding the Governor's veto of House Bill 68," said the SAFE Act's initial sponsor, state Rep. Gary Click (R-Vickery). "The SAFE Act and Save Women's Sports Act are the civil rights issues of our day, ensuring that children have the right to grow up intact and that women are no long subject to men invading their spaces."

Click was gracious in victory, suggesting that DeWine "acted from his heart."

"I continue to feel that with more time and opportunity it may have been possible for the governor to share in our understanding of this vital issue," continued Click. "Nevertheless, he did what he felt was right, as he should. The legislature, however, felt just as strongly if not more so that HB 68 was imperative to save lives, uphold medical ethics, and reaffirm women's rights."

"The citizens of Ohio were unequivocal in their demand that the legislature act and we did. The system worked," added Click.

Ahead of the override, the Ohio Senate Republicans cited recent polls indicating the general public was behind them in championing legislation such as HB 68.

A HarrixX poll conducted last year for Deseret News found that 61% of all voters said sex changes should be banned for minors.

The previous year, a Trafalgar Group survey showed that "78.7 percent of voters believe underage minors should be required to wait until they are adults to legally use puberty blockers and undergo permanent sex-change procedures." Even a majority of Democrats indicated prospective victims should wait until adulthood before undergoing medical interventions.

A Washington Post-KFF poll published last year revealed that 68% of U.S. adults opposed the provision of puberty blockers to children ages 10-14; 58% opposed hormone treatments for teens ages 15-17.

Anger and harm

LGBT activists are furious over the legislative expression of the will of Ohioans.

Siobhan Boyd-Nelson, the executive director of the radical activist group Equality Ohio, claimed in a Wednesday statement, "Lawmakers have made it clear that they are more concerned with protecting their political aspirations than protecting children, protecting women, or tackling the numerous pressing issues Ohioans are actually facing."

The Human Rights Campaign, a mammoth LGBT lobbying outfit, called the vote "shameful" and threatened, "This isn't over."

HRC campaign president Kelley Robinson stated, "These legislators have abdicated their responsibility to do what's right for the Ohioans they represent, casting votes that they know full well will harm innocent children, all to appease the leader of the MAGA agenda."

While various activists have accused GOP lawmakers of exposing confused children to harm, it appears the treatments they have just banned pose the real danger.

Blaze News previously reported that prominent physicians admitted during a September 2022 educational session conducted by the the World Professional Association for Transgender Health that puberty blockers can have disastrous effects on minors, including infertility, bone loss, and brain development disruptions.

A study published in September 2022 in the Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy revealed that puberty blockers deplete victims' bone density, hamper their cognitive development, and produce a myriad of harmful emotional effects.

A September 2023 study published in the European Journal of Endocrinology revealed that male transvestites taking feminizing hormones are 93% more likely to suffer heart disease than other males. Female transvestites taking testosterone are 63% more likely to suffer heart disease than other females.

The American College of Cardiology confirmed last year that "people with gender dysphoria taking hormone replacements as part of gender affirmation therapy face a substantially increased risk of serious cardiac events, including stroke, heart attack and pulmonary embolism."

Although captive to LGBT ideology, the World Health Organization recently admitted that the evidence concerning "longer-term outcomes of gender affirming care for children and adolescents" is "limited and variable."

Walid Farhat, chief of pediatric urology at the UW’s School of Medicine and Public Health, indicated in an April 2023 grant application that research on the impacts of cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers is "severely lacking."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Nikki Haley wants to 'defund the UN as much as possible' but would not support US withdrawal



GOP presidential primary candidate Nikki Haley, who served as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during a portion of former President Donald Trump's White House tenure, has indicated that while she supports defunding "the UN as much as possible," she would not support America withdrawing from the organization.

During an appearance on the Fox News Channel, Haley told Sean Hannity that the reason for not withdrawing from the U.N. is that that the U.S. is one of the five countries with a veto. "And the number of things we were able to stop China, Russia, and Iran from doing with that veto matters. And so you keep bad things from happening. But we don't have to pay at the level that we're paying," she said.

China, France, Russia, the U.S., and the U.K. have veto power in the U.N. Security Council.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who is also vying for the GOP presidential nomination, has indicated that he would support defunding the U.N.

"We will unequivocally support Israel, take names, make it clear those countries who are hostile to Israel risk their relations with us, and defund the UN," DeSantis said in a post on X. "No longer should American taxpayer dollars support this corrupt, morally bankrupt, hotbed of antisemitism that empowers our enemies and coddles dictators and the worst human rights abusers."

DeSantis press secretary Bryan Griffin shared DeSantis' post, writing, "Ron DeSantis will defund the UN."

Haley raised eyebrows earlier this week by saying that all social media users "should be verified by their name." She said this would eliminate Russian, Chinese, and Iranian bots and result in increased civility because people would know that their name will appear along with their posts.

Later, during an appearance on CNBC's "Squawk Box," Haley said that she wants free speech for Americans but not for Russia and Hamas. She said "we need our social media companies to verify everybody." While she allowed for anonymous free speech for Americans, she indicated that she does not support the same when it comes to Russians, Chinese, and Iranians.

"What Nikki doesn't support is letting the Chinese and Iranians create anonymous accounts to spread chaos and anti-American filth among our people," Haley campaign spokesperson Olivia Perez-Cubas noted, according to the Associated Press. "Social media companies have to do a way better job policing that."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden Vetoes Republican-Led Effort To Stop Strict Vehicle Emissions Regulations

The EPA rule is 80% stricter than the previous regulation