His explanation?
“Because the Congress has chosen to send me an essentially identical bill that has the same problems as the flawed bill I previously vetoed, I must veto this legislation, too.”
This is the 10th veto of Bush's presidency and exemplifies his continuing conflicts with the Democrat-led Congress.
What is the debate about? Money! Spending has been the issue of frustration and dispute!
The current plan of which more than 6.6 million children are enrolled in, called the S-Chip program, needs more funding if it is to continue. To continue, an estimated $5.8 billion is needed per year, which is $800 million more than the current annual budget. Democrats sent the bill allowing increased spending of $35 billion and allowed another 4 million children to join the program.
However, the White House responds by saying
“This Congress failed to send the president legislation that puts children first, and instead they sent for a second time one that would allow adults onto the program, expand to higher incomes, and raise taxes,” said Dana Perino, the White House press secretary.What will become of this constant debate between White House and Congress?
Full Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/12/washington/12cnd-bush.html?hp
7 comments:
Although i do not know all the details, I think there is something wrong if Bush has vetoed a total of 10 bills in his presidency. He is seemingly becoming more irresponsible in that hes vetoing bill after bill after bill, and not trying to push forward any other progressive solutions. I know tension exists because of the split parties in office (rep bush - dem congress), but after several years you'd think these basic issues would be less infulential. The republican calim that it is just another bill to raise the income and taxes seems likea last resort excuse. Since Bush is nearing his presidency, I wouldn't be surprised to see him being more strict than ever. Hopefully nothing too serious, like the midnight appointments that spurred more problems after the election, will occur.
I think that Bush doesn't want to pass this legislation because it will cut into his war budget. He wants to minimize the amount of money the country spends on itself and instead use that money on the war in Iraq. Although this might not be the primary reason, it's hard to believe that this did not play a factor in his decision to veto these bills. Even though I don't know the specific actions of this legislation, its highly likely that it does place children first, contrary to what Perino says.
I saw a clip a few weeks back of a livid Democratic congressman expressing his views right after bush vetoed this bill for the first time. The congressman accused Bush of wanting to kill Americans because he refuses to allowed money for the health expenses of low income children yet keeps sending kids to "get their heads blown off" in Iraq. I though the congressman brought up a good point: how can Bush complain about $800 million for kids while he spends billions per day on a war in Iraq.
I agree with what Eddie said about Bush and how his priorities don't make sense. Bush abusing his veto power has basically been like a little kid not getting what he wants."If you don't pass my bill then I wont pass yours." This seems ridiculous because as Eddie said he's spending a load of money on the a war that shouldn't exist but is against giving money to children. Bush's priorities are definitely digging himself a grave.
While it seems like we should be focusing on the vetos, I can't seem to get over the fact that he's vetoing on money when he's currently spending over 447billion in a war that isn't popular within the country (http://zfacts.com/p/447.html). Instead of helping children within our boarders, money is going elsewere--yes to protect or soldiers, but it all leads back to the idea of how fast we should pull back out of Iraq and save that money. I know that no one could possibly just dismiss these bills because he doesn't care, but after issuing a tenth veto, it's really starting to come across that way. If he's vetoing something that seems essential to the next generation's progress, what else do you think he might veto? He only has a little time left, but I can only hope that he uses it wisely.
i cant be certain of the finite details of the two bills that he has rejected but if they were very similar to one another i can see why he would reject both, it makes sense, its called consistency. dont mistaken me pointing this out for support of the veto or bush.
We aren't spending billions a day in Iraq. Some of the figures thrown around recently ($1 Trillion+) are very long term projections including the cost of borrowing. Be skeptical. It is an expensive war, but that expense doesn't justify every other potentially worthy program on the merits. I wish people had more awareness of the sloppy contracting done in this war that allowed some major war profiteering -- lazy inattention to those details suggests that Bush isn't really maximizing taxpayer investments so much as following ideology: private business good, public sector bad. Some people really think it is that simple.
Post a Comment