Veto Threat #135

The president who has never had to use his veto pen issued his 135th veto threat yesterday, this time on an emergency spending bill that covers, among other things, the war.

The White House promises to veto a huge Senate bill to pay for the rising costs of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and to repair Hurricane Katrina damage unless the cost to taxpayers is scaled back to President Bush’s original requests.

The must-pass $106.5 billion bill exceeds Bush’s February request by more than $14 billion with add-ons for farm aid, highway repairs and aid to the Gulf Coast fishing industry, among others, drawing the ire of the White House and conservative Republicans.

There is, to be sure, some unrelated spending projects in the bill, but hearing that Bush is prepared to veto funding for the war takes me back to 2004. When John Kerry voted against an emergency spending bill because he didn’t want to give Bush a blank check, it became one of the key GOP arguments against Kerry’s candidacy — to oppose a spending bill with funds for Iraq was to oppose the troops. There were no nuances or gray areas. Now, it seems, one can have a problem with the way a spending bill is shaped but not hate men and women in uniform. Good to know.

Campaign bitterness aside, the Senate bill, as of now, contains $72.4 billion for military operations, $27 billion for hurricane relief, $4 billion for agricultural disaster assistance, $2.3 billion for pandemic flu preparedness, and $648 million for port security. (Bush will reportedly go for the flu money, but not the other extras.) In all, there are more than $14 billion in add-ons, which prompted yesterday’s threat.

Oddly enough, it almost seems as if some of Bush’s allies hope the Senate doesn’t back down and Bush has to follow through on his threat.

David A. Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, said Americans want Congress to curb out-of-control federal spending, not add to it. “They’re playing the game that Democrats played for 40 years: ‘We can buy our re-election,’ ” he said.

Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, said, “It’s in the president’s interest to veto this bill.”

What’s going to happen? On the Senate floor today, lawmakers were so anxious to add new money for border patrol that they started taking money away from war appropriations.

It’s an election year — and it’s awfully tough to convince members of Congress not to spend more on domestic priorities.

Veto (empty) Threat #135 ……. I hope

So he wants war on the cheap and does not want to do more for desperate American citizens hurt by natural disaster. Tell me why people voted for him?

  • Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., said Gregg’s cuts would “take money from troop pay, body armor and even joint improvised explosive device defeat fund. Now that is a false choice and it is a wrong choice.”

    Gregg responded heatedly…
    “To come down here and allege that these funds are going to come out of the needs of the people on the front lines in Iraq or Afghanistan is pure poppycock,” he said.

    Riiiiiight. And they way this Congress has gutted veteran’s payments was just pure jibber-jabber…until it happened.

    I would be curious as to which of the GOP Senators added riders to this bill. The Republican’ts are notorious for wanting to pork their constituents.

  • Simple enough…offset the increases through repeal of tax cuts on the top 1% of income earners. IF you want to buy an election the way to do it is to help 99% of the people while only hurting 1%. Interesting that Bush’s war is not becoming fiscally entangled with Bush’s Hurricane disaster and Bush’s border security problems and Bush’s problems with terrorism (Ports version) and Bush’s preventive public health preparedness problem. Man, he’s got a lot of problems.

    How exactly does tax and spend get tagged on Senate Dems when the Senate Repbulikans could easily have stopped the bill in the first place? Sorry, I slipped in to pre- 9/11 reality based thinking there for a minute. I’m better now. Freedom! Jesus Bless America! Put Reagan on Mt Rushmore and take that Roosevelt schmuck down! Got to go. I hear the call to prayer emanating from the TV.

  • Bush’s no veto streak is reflecting the Republican dominance of all phases of government. His first actual veto will mark the end of an era where special interests had such a lock on the House, Senate, and the White House that grandstanding for popular approval within the majority party wasn’t necessary.
    With coming elections, now it might be.

  • Did you see he also threatened a veto if Congress changed inventory tax rules for oil companies that are giving them a windfall right now?

  • Comments are closed.