Bush Uses Veto To Nix Bipartisan $23 Million Water Bill

It sounds as if President George Bush wasn’t kidding when he suggested that one reason he’s still “relevant” is because he has the veto power: after years of not using it, he seems to be in a phase of government by veto…even on a bipartisan measure for a $23 million water bill:

President Bush delivered his threatened veto of a $23-billion water bill Friday, but Congress is virtually certain to reverse it in the first override of a Bush veto.

And Bush and the Democratic-controlled Congress are moving closer to a federal budget showdown that could result in more vetoes.

The House and Senate are expected to move swiftly next week to override Bush’s veto of a bill loaded with water-related projects sought by members of both parties, from shoring up California’s levees to protecting the Gulf Coast from hurricanes.

In a statement accompanying his veto, Bush said, “This bill lacks fiscal discipline.”

The problem for Bush is that he’s a Georgie-come-lately to fiscal responsibility. One recent report noted that he is actually a bigger spender than the poster-boy for big-spending presidents, Lyndon Baines Johnson. And the report says defense is NOT the only reason for the big spending. But Campaign 2008 is approaching and this is what’s called political positioning. MORE:

On Capitol Hill, Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) said, “I am 100% confident that we can override this veto.”

The defiant bipartisan response to the veto underscores the difficulty the president faces in his new zeal to hold down federal spending, especially when it affects highly visible construction projects cherished by lawmakers.

“This will be the first veto this Congress has overridden, and it was all about getting parochial water projects back to their home districts,” said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group.

The bill would authorize more than 900 projects, such as restoration in the Florida Everglades and the replacement of seven Depression-era locks on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers that farm groups say is crucial for shipping grain.

But profuse use of the veto pen may not be a plus with most Americans in 2008. By then “plight” stories will have been done by newspapers about children who were already receiving health care money that was denied them due to the veto of children’s health care (this will happen in several states).

Stories will also likely detail the continued cost of the war in Iraq, which will provide a counterpoint and contrast to some of the domestic programs denied funds due to the President’s 11th hour discovery that he is running a government that puts a priority on tight spending.

On the other hand, Bush is proving to be a “uniter not a divider” as he promised in 2000 because this veto is already irking both Republicans and Democrats. Note this news story from Michigan:

Several members of Michigan’s congressional delegation say they’re unhappy with President Bush’s decision to veto a bill authorizing hundreds of water projects.

Bush vetoed legislation providing $23 billion for projects to restore wetlands, prevent flooding and help protect the Great Lakes. Several Democrats and Republicans said they’ll vote to override the veto. Congress is expected to have enough votes.

Democratic U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak from Menominee said the bill had widespread bipartisan support.

Republican Congresswoman Candice Miller from Harrison Township says she’s “incredibly disappointed” by Bush’s veto. She said the bill would provide $20 million for the Lake St. Clair/St. Clair River Management plan. It also would study a plan to restore the Clinton River.

But the bad news for the Republicans is that the Democrats plan to use Bush as an issue to defeat Congressional Republicans:

U.S. President George W. Bush will not be on a ballot in 2008 but Democrats said on Wednesday they plan to make him the centerpiece of their campaign to boost their majorities in Congress.

They argued the prolonged war in Iraq combined with their stalemate with Bush over issues like a plan in Congress to expand child health care coverage make him a good foil to use in the November 2008 election.

“At least in terms of incumbents who supported Bush 90 or 92 or 94 or 96 percent of the time, we believe that will be a very potent issue in 2008,” said Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

One political expert said Democrats used Bush effectively last year to recapture Congress, seizing on his low approval ratings, and they are expected to boost their margins next year.

“It is a little bit of deja vu from 2006 and it’s hard to argue with them because it worked,” said Jennifer Duffy, an analyst at the Cook Political Report. “Especially on the Senate side … the environment is still very good for Democrats.”

Declaring fiscal responsibility as a principle is laudatory, but this is coming so late in the game that it likely won’t convinced liberals, moderates OR traditional Goldwater-style conservatives. And when Bush vetoes a program that local people wanted — that either deprives their kids of health care they had or thought they might get — it plays right into the Democrats’ hands. And is bad news for GOPers running for re-election, — even if they try to show relative independence from the White House.