Advertisement
It was the first veto override in Bush’s seven years as president.
Enactment was a foregone conclusion, but it still marked a milestone for a president who spent his first six years with a much friendlier Congress controlled by his Republican Party. Now he confronts a more hostile, Democratic-controlled legislature, and Thursday’s vote showed that even many Republicans will defy him on spending matters dear to their political careers.
The $23 billion bill funds hundreds of Army Corps of Engineers projects, such as dams, sewage plants and beach restoration, that are important to local communities and their representatives.
One such earmark will give the city of Goodview $3 million to help build a federally mandated radium filtration plant that is expected to cost more than $5 million.
The bill also provides money for a flood control project in Roseau and lock and dam improvements on the Upper Mississippi River.
Earlier this week, the House voted 361-54 to override the veto. On Thursday the Senate vote was 79-14 to enact the bill. The Senate had originally approved the bill 81-12, easily enough votes for a two-thirds majority needed for an override.
Both Minnesota senators, Democrat Amy Klobuchar and Republican Norm Coleman, voted to override the veto.
Bush has called the $23.2 billion bill fiscally irresponsible, but lawmakers weren’t buying that.
“I was extremely disappointed by the president’s veto of this bill,” Coleman said after the vote. “While I appreciate the president’s call for fiscal responsibility, shortchanging our infrastructure is penny-wise and pound-foolish.”
“Today, I was proud to cast my vote to override the president’s veto of the Water Resources Development Act,” said Klobuchar. “The overwhelming, bipartisan nature of this override speaks volumes about the critical nature of these projects, and that the president’s veto is just plain wrong.”
In the House, all Minnesota members voted to override the bill, except for Rep. Jim Oberstar, who missed the vote because he was recovering from neck surgery. Oberstar was a leading sponsor of the bill.
Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., and Ron Kind, D-Wis., both praised the bill.
Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., voted to override after voting against the bill when it passed the House in April. She said she changed sides because of stronger cost accounting measures for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The last such veto override happened when Congress dealt President Clinton the second of his two overrides in November 1998.
Bush vetoed no bills during his first five years in office. He has since vetoed a stem cell research bill twice, an Iraq spending bill that set guidelines for troop withdrawals, and a children’s health insurance bill. House and Senate Republicans managed to sustain those vetoes. But he had vehemently objected to the water bill.
But they broke ranks on the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA, which Bush vetoed on Nov. 2, calling it too expensive.
His supporters have noted that the Army Corps has a backlog of $58 billion worth of projects and an annual budget of about $2 billion to address them.
The bill, the first water system restoration and flood control authorization passed by Congress since 2000, would cost $11.2 billion over the next four years, and $12 billion in the 10 years after that, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Flood protection projects along the Gulf Coast, including 100-year levee protection in New Orleans, would cost about $7 billion if fully funded. The bill approves projects but does not fund them.
What does this mean for Minnesota?
The $23 billion water resources bill includes about $97 million for Minnesota projects, including:
kevin11 wrote on Nov 13, 2007 8:01 PM: