Pass it anyway

July 18, 2006

A not-so-liberal emailer contacted me over night with a fair argument about today’s vote in the Senate about expanding [tag]stem-cell[/tag] [tag]research[/tag]. The email suggested a certain hypocrisy: if we know [tag]Bush[/tag] is going to [tag]veto[/tag] the bill, then there’s no point in going through the motions. I’ve criticized lawmakers repeatedly for wasting time on legislation they know isn’t going to become law, just to score some political points, so why is this different?

It’s a fair point, but I think it’s ultimately mistaken. There are several of reasons for the [tag]Senate[/tag] to ignore the [tag]president[/tag]’s veto [tag]threat[/tag].

* Bush has caved before — In 2000 and 2001, Bush repeatedly and publicly said he’d veto McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation. The GOP base, which strongly opposed the measure, expected the president to keep his word. He didn’t. Facing political pressure and polls showing strong bi-partisan support for the bill, Bush reversed course and signed the bill into law. He did the same thing with Congress’ transportation bill and an anti-torture measure in 2005 (though, with the latter, he used a signing statement to get around the need for a veto). Just because Bush says he’s going to veto something doesn’t mean he will.

* There may be a little wiggle room — Even in denouncing the legislation yesterday, the White House showed that Bush could still sign this bill into law. The president has said he’d oppose any effort to “create new incentives for the ongoing destruction of emerging human life” — except the legislation doesn’t create new incentives for anything; it merely uses embryos already created for in vitro fertilization. The White House has also said the president would reject any effort to create human life “for the purpose of destroying it,” which is fine since the legislation centers on using embryos that otherwise would be discarded — and the bill does not permit embryos to be created specifically for the purpose of medical research.

And then there’s the third, and probably most important, reason, at least as far as the Bush gang goes…

* A Bush veto is a gift to the Dems — As DSCC Chairman Charles Schumer said, “This will be one of the major issues of the campaign, and it is going to allow us to win voters we have not won before.” GOP officials think the veto will balance out in the end thanks to support from the far-right base. They’re mistaken. The legislation is going to pass both chambers with bi-partisan majorities and it enjoys broad support nationwide. Dems have been waiting for a wedge issue like this for two years — and Bush is poised to help gift-wrap it for them. Facing this kind of pressure — and getting leaned on by Nancy Reagan — Bush may still see the electoral writing on the wall.

Bush has been consistently disappointing the religious right for years, taking advantage of the movement’s hopes and using the groups’ activists, while offering very little in return. Of all the times for the White House to take the Dobson crowd seriously, Bush picks potentially life-saving stem-cell research? Four months before an election? For the first veto of his presidency?

Everyone knows someone who has Parkinson’s, or a spinal cord injury, or cancer, heart disease, diabetes, or Alzheimer’s. And everyone wants a treatment that offers hope for millions. With this in mind, it’s hard to tolerate Bush standing in the laboratories’ doors asking scientists to do more with less.

In terms of politics, it’s a huge risk for the GOP. In terms of policy, it’s a huge risk for those waiting for effective treatments. The Senate vote is today and the White House decision is tomorrow. Stay tuned.

Two words:
signing statement

  • I fully agree with Mr. C.B.’s logic of why it makes perfect political sense for The Royal Buffoon to sign the bill and avoid the “political gift” to the Dems. But, as we all know too well, Bush is anything but logical. Further, he can never pass up and opportunity to say “fuck you” to the Dems. Finally, I fully expect that Bush will veto the bill because he is The Decider, and he decided he would, and we all know that Bush’s stubborness is a sign of his resolve (yada, yada, yada). God help us all…

  • There is a huge difference between pushing legislation that has no chance to pass and passing legislation that may be vetoed. Polls show that people care about and are in favor of stem-cell research, in stark contrast to the flag burning, gay marriage, and even immigration issues, which most people are not much concerned about.

    My mother had nine siblings. Of the nine who lived past the age of seventy, four contracted Alzheimer’s. There are now some seventy descendents of those ten children. I don’t know if the disease passes generationally or at what rate, but it is fair to assume that twelve to twenty of us, and perhaps many more, will someday get it. One of the older cousins has already been diagnosed with early signs, and she is not even sixty.

    Will stem-cell research lead to a cure or treatment? I have no idea. But I know for certain that prayer alone will not.

    No one is dying from flags being burned or gays wanting to get married. Stem-cell research could save lives.

  • In an amusing way, this is pork barrel politics. Congress is using earmarks to fund a program not supported by the Administration. That’s why I don’t think a signing statement will mean much.

    Will Boy George II veto this bill. He hasn’t vetoed a lot worse stuff, like the transportation bill or every spending bill that has come across his desk. Maybe he’ll proclaim, after reading the bill, that it isn’t ‘immoral’, as CB points out.

    But in the end, I think Boy George II will remember that he put all that thought and effort into crafting his August 2001 policy on stem cell research, and damnit, that should be good enough for anyone. So what if the 60 plus lines are down to 20 and they all were grown on beds of mouse cells, thus encouraging trans-species migration of deadly viruses, and they were all developed using one technique patented by one company that will get all the royalities for any treatments developed from them? Nope, Boy George II has spoken, and will veto any attempt to change policy in his administration.

    So I look to and expect a veto.

    An override in the House, that would be unexpected.

  • Here’s what I don’t get: Why would Bush veto this bill? He isn’t running for anything so he doesn’t need to appease his base.

    I suppose it’s some Rovian strategy for the mid-terms, but I don’t understand how it’s supposed to work. What’s the benefit of a veto to Republican members of Congress, compared with just signing the damn thing and taking credit for it.

    Maybe the veto is just intended to keep Dobson et al in the game, and to keep disappointed fundie voters from staying home in droves.

  • Congress has the opportunity, with this single issue, to wrest control of the Legislative Authority away from the Thief Executive and his Dubious Dobson Gang. The House already passed this thing by a wide margin; the Senate has the chance to do the same. If KG uses his veto on something that’s known to be of value to the People, then there’s a chance—just a chance, mind you—that KG’s first veto will be countered by his first trip on the “Congressional Over-ride Express.”

    Think of it like this—KG smacks Congress in the face with his silken gauntlet, and Congress replies with a really big crowbar.

    On the other hand, those who kowtow to KG by letting him veto their power can be peddled to the electorate as “wimpish.” They can be portrayed as “walking away from their responsibility to their constituents for the chance to be in Bush’s pocket.” And, walking off the job is a really good reason to fire someboby, isn’t it?

    Save a ring-side seat for me; I’ll bring the popcorn!

  • perhaps a little on the semantic side, but i feel like the republicans use of the word “destruction” relating to the left over embryos is just another one of their rhetorical tropes, that we on the correct side should not fall for. Scientific research is not destroying anything, because these tiny groupings of cells have no potential to do anything unless they are implanted. In fact, i wonder what percentage of in vitro implantations are successful. If one of those doesn’t work, has the doctor destroyed something, by trying to help a women get pregnant. I don’t think so. scientific research is about creating knowledge, and the potential for cures, there is nothing being destroyed here.

  • I agree with Steve (#6) in that the one reason not in CB’s post that should be is the possibility of override. It is not like this is so far short of votes that it amounts to mere theater. An override is a very real possibility here.

  • He’s not going to veto a thing.
    Dobson can say this or that, but does anyone really think Dobson is going to tell the kool-aid drinkers to vote Democrat ??

    The problem the extremists have is they have no one else to turn to, democrats pretty much think they are a joke, independents aren’t running anything soon, so all they have left is republicans that throw them a scrap here and there so they actually vote.

    Dobson will gladly take a scrap from a republican, then a nothing from everyone else.

  • Shouldn’t someone from the liberal media be looking around to see if there aren’t any of Bush’s relatives that have Parkinson’s or Alzheimers, and interviewing their families, to see what their opinions are?

    I guess if we had a real press, maybe.

  • I really don’t understand why anyone expects a veto, when the overly simple reading of Bush history gives a 0% chance. How is this issue supposed to be different from the other ones on which he has caved?

  • The whole thing could still go either way, but if the Republicans want to be labeled “The Party of Death” then vetoing this bill and not overriding that veto would be the way to do it.

    Platoons of neocon pundits have been raving for the last couple of days about bombing Syria and Iran while Lebannon goes up in flames. Their plan seems to be to pacify the Middle East by exterminating everyone in it, or at least enough to make resistance to American dominion too feeble to succeed.

    Now George says he’ll veto a bill that could save countless lives. Pretty much nails the coffin shut on where Republican priorities lie, doesn’t it?

    Man, I am cranky today. Must be the heat, I guess.

  • “Dobson can say this or that, but does anyone really think Dobson is going to tell the kool-aid drinkers to vote Democrat ??” – ScottW

    I keep hoping the Theocratic Reactionaries will get pissed off and form their own party. It’s not like they have gotten anything from the Republican’ts since 1980.

    We don’t have prayer in school,
    We still have a department of Education,
    We still have Roe vs. Wade,
    We are going to have Gay Marriage over the next two decades.

    These guys don’t get squat and they have to do all the ground work for these Republican’t campaigns. They do the calling and put up the lawn signs. They should be getting sick of it. I don’t know why they don’t.

  • But how, exactly, is #3 different from Republican motivations for their bills? Just asking.

  • The fundies have it exactly backwards –

    The stem cells are expected to be destroyed if they are not allowed to be used for research.

    The stem cells will certainly be kept alive — dead stem cells wouldn’t be very effective for research at all.

    • Comments are closed.