Russ Feingold, Paul Ryan, and Line Item Veto

It's time to be bipartisan.

From CBS/AP:

Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold and Republican Rep. Paul Ryan are forming an unlikely partnership to push Congress to pass line item veto legislation.

That would give President Barack Obama the power to strike individual items from budget bills.

The lawmakers from Janesville, Wis., joined Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona on Wednesday to reintroduce the legislation.

The Supreme Court struck down previous line item veto legislation in 1998, and subsequent efforts to pass it did not gain traction.

Feingold, Ryan and McCain say their bill was tweaked to make it constitutional. They also say that a line item veto is an important way to cut wasteful spending as the country deals with a slumping economy and the president makes tough budget decisions.

Feingold is one of a few Senate Democrats voicing opposition to a pending $410 billion catchall spending bill, unhappy with its cost and changes to U.S. policy toward Cuba.

Most importantly, Democrats Evan Bayh and Feingold announced Wednesday that they are voting against the bill, and each urged President Barack Obama to veto it if it passes later this week.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

"This bill is about the need to stop wasteful earmarks especially in this time of economic crisis," Feingold said. "And if Congress won't restrain itself, the president should be able to try."

Rep. Paul Ryan, a Janesville Republican, is pushing a similar proposal in the House.

"Our goal is to embarrass the pork out of Washington," Ryan said Wednesday. "And by giving the president and the Congress this tool, we can help bring sunshine to this murky process and embarrass pork-barrel spending out of these packages."

I like the way Paul Ryan puts it: "Our goal is to embarrass the pork out of Washington."

It's a worthy goal and a noble effort by John McCain and the Wisconsin senator and congressman.

However, I can't help but be struck by Feingold's inconsistency. He speaks out of both sides of his mouth.

He says he's going to vote against the $410 billion spending bill. Terrific.

But that doesn't click with Feingold's recent behavior. Hypocrite Feingold went ahead and voted for the so-called economic stimulus bill. That pork-laden, earmark-loaded monster didn't bother Feingold.

When Feingold was out hawking the stimulus bill, he was interviewed by Mike Gousha, Upfront.

Gousha asked Feingold if what he's being told privately about the economic outlook is frightening.

FEINGOLD: Well, it is frightening... It's clear that things are very difficult and are still getting worse, so there isn't any sort of big secret message we're getting.

But the direction is so clear and it's so negative that it's obvious we have to do something dramatic, something that goes against my very nature to vote for something like this that involves making the deficit so much bigger.

This is the hardest thing to do, but I think it's the responsible thing to do based on what we're being told privately and based on what we all see publicly as well.

Voting for that load of pork was responsible, but voting for the spending bill isn't. That doesn't make sense.

This is classic Feingold.

He's a maverick. He'll cross party lines. Sure.

And then he turns around and marches in lock-step with the Dems even when it clearly violates what he claims are his principles.

That's the difference between Feingold and Paul Ryan -- consistency.

Feingold lacks what makes Ryan such a rising star in the Republican Party -- principles and the integrity to uphold them.