Differences between the United States Constitution and the Confederate Constitution

Abstract

Two significant differences between the United States Constitution and the Confederate Constitution were the line-item veto the latter granted to the President and the combined measures the Confederate Constitution instituted to guarantee the survival of slavery.

The line-item veto presented the President of the Confederacy with a supreme advantage—it gave him a tool with which he could afford to be more selective. The President was able to “approve any appropriation and disapprove any other appropriation in the same bill.” There are numerous benefits to this bestowed power. For one thing, time would be saved, at both the executive and legislative end. In the Constitution of the United States, if a President is extremely opposed to one part of a bill, a part which, in his opinion, absolutely cannot be allowed to pass, he is forced to veto the entire bill, although he may support other sections of it. The entire thing, therefore, is sent back to Congress for reworking, and both participating parties are sent again to square one.

The President returns to idleness on the bill's featured issues and Congress, obligated to put its nose to the grindstone once more, fares substantially worse—losing a great deal of precious time. The Confederacy likely featured the line-item veto in its Constitution in order to avoid such trouble. It probably also anticipated the endless bill attachments, or earmarks, that so often slip into today's legislation. The line-item veto that it gave the President allowed him to do away with those annoyances, which compile to billions of spent dollars yearly, while simultaneously pushing Congress members to be more selective in what they try to toss into law, lest their appropriations be vetoed.