<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-1.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Gubernatorial use of the item veto for narrative deletion</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Abney, Glenn</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">creator</roleTerm>
    </role>
  </name>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Lauth, Thomas P.</namePart>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="code" authority="marccountry">xu|</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <dateIssued>2002</dateIssued>
    <issuance>continuing</issuance>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">ng </languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <extent>p.492-503.</extent>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract>Legislative use of narrative, such as conditions and riders,  in appropriations bills has become common and has had negative consequences for the executive budget and veto, as well as for the legislative process. Some governors have used the  item veto as a remedy. While they have not necessarily diminished the amount of narrative, they have achieved some protection of the executive budget and veto power. Their success  depends greatly on the type of legal authority embodied in this constitutional power. - Reproduced.</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>Budget</topic>
  </subject>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <name>
      <namePart>Public Administration Review</namePart>
    </name>
  </relatedItem>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">180718</recordCreationDate>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
