JOINT RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AND PUBLISH AND SUBMIT TO THE ELECTORS A PROPOSITION OF AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE -- REFERENDUM ON LINE ITEM VETO (This proposed amendment to the Constitution would provide the governor with a line item veto on the budget and other bills for the appropriation of money.)
Summary
S0308 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would ask Rhode Island voters to approve a line item veto for the governor. Under the resolution, the governor would retain the existing veto power over bills, resolutions, and votes passed by the General Assembly, but would also be able to reduce specific dollar amounts in appropriation bills while approving the rest of the measure. The proposal also allows the governor to disapprove individual items or parts of items in appropriation bills, subject to the same legislative override process that applies to other vetoes.
The amendment is written to replace Article IX, Section 14 of the Rhode Island Constitution. It specifies that any reduced or disapproved appropriation item would be separately reconsidered by the General Assembly, and it includes limits on how the governor may exercise the partial veto power. For example, the governor could not create new words by striking letters or create new sentences by combining parts of sentences. It also addresses conditions attached to appropriated funds, providing that if a disapproved condition is tied to a specific appropriation, the corresponding funds would remain in the general appropriation rather than being reduced.
If approved by the legislature, the proposal would be submitted to the electorate at the next statewide general election. The Secretary of State would be required to publish the amendment and include it in election notices, and local voting procedures would follow the same rules used for general officer elections. Because this is a constitutional amendment rather than a regular statute, its effect would be to change the state’s governing framework for executive-legislative budget disputes.
The overall sentiment in the available record appears neutral to mildly supportive of expanding executive budget authority, but there is no committee transcript or vote history provided to show detailed debate or bipartisan agreement. The bill was introduced by several senators, suggesting at least some legislative interest in the proposal. However, the absence of recorded votes or hearing discussion means there is no direct evidence here of formal opposition or support beyond the bill’s sponsorship and subject matter.
The main point of contention is likely the balance of power between the governor and the General Assembly over appropriations. Supporters would likely view the line item veto as a tool to control spending and remove objectionable budget provisions without rejecting an entire appropriations bill, while opponents may see it as weakening legislative control over the budget and enabling executive overreach. The specific restrictions on how the veto could be used suggest an effort to address those concerns by limiting the governor’s ability to rewrite legislation through partial vetoes.
Impact
This resolution would amend the Rhode Island Constitution by replacing Article IX, Section 14 and creating a constitutional line item veto for appropriation bills. It would change the governor’s authority in the budget process by allowing partial approval, reduction of specific appropriated sums, and disapproval of individual items or parts of items, while preserving the General Assembly’s ability to override those actions under existing supermajority rules. If adopted by voters, it would directly affect the constitutional separation of powers and the handling of state spending measures.
Sentiment
The available materials suggest a generally favorable or at least serious policy interest in giving the governor a line item veto, but there is no committee transcript or vote record to show the depth of support or opposition. Because the proposal is a constitutional amendment and must go to the voters, the discussion implied by the text is framed more as a structural government reform than a partisan policy bill. No formal recorded sentiment from hearings or votes is available in the provided record.
Contention
The central controversy is whether the governor should have greater authority to alter appropriation bills after passage by the General Assembly. Supporters are likely to argue that a line item veto improves fiscal discipline and prevents wasteful spending, while critics may argue that it shifts budget power away from the legislature and could be used to pressure lawmakers or reshape policy through selective vetoes. The bill’s detailed limits on partial vetoes indicate concern about executive overreach and the possibility of the governor effectively rewriting legislation.