Why does the President have veto power and what should it be used for?

[LyLMyssChaos]

This has been discussed in the stem cell thread slightly and it got me thinking: If we do in fact have a "representative government" and those representatives vote to pass a bill, why does the President have the right to veto it? A lot of people are upset that the President has vetoed the ESCR bill despite a "majority" of people wanting said bill to pass. The supporters feel that if it passed through Congress, that there is no reason for it not to become a bill because Congress is the voice for America. Wouldn't that be the case with any bill that is passed? And if so, why does the President have "veto" power anyway? And in what instances should the President exercise that right to veto without coming across as a dictator?

[Sarah]

As I alluded to in the other thread, it's complicated because there are times when the will of the people conflicts with the "right thing to do" (of course a subjective thing). I am not sure how to reconcile it, myself. For example when school desegregation was enforced, it was not the will of the people, but it was (IMO) the right thing, and the opinions of people changed. When RvW was passed, it was not the will of the people, but many feel it was the right or Constitutional thing.

Neither of those have to do with vetoes, just the idea of whether the will of the people should be enforced (by the president sometimes) or the "right" thing, or the Constitutional thing.

[Jazz]

"Checks and balances" -- I think it's important, even if I disagree with the ESCR veto.

FWIW, I'm equally frustrated with senators and rep's who didn't vote to overturn the veto. (I live in a red red state, and both my senators and the rep for my district did vote for the bill, though the other two reps did not.) Perhaps, I'm more frustrated with Congress, because they are directly the representatives of the people, a sizeable majority of whom wanted the bill to pass. However, just like the president, Congressmen need to square their vote with their own consciences. If that doesn't meet the view of their constitutents, then they may not be re-elected.

I think it's a pretty good system.