As California Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring is fond of saying, in order for Republicans to take back our majority, we need to present a positive, contrasting message to that espoused by the other party. There is no part of the GOP’s message that is more important to that ‘contrast’ than the idea that Republicans stand for fiscal prudence, and sanity when it comes to spending. Unlike our Democrat counterparts, whose unfettered and free-spending ways are consistent with their view of a massive role for the United States government, Republicans should be able to coalesce around the idea of cutting federal spending, which happens to be consistent with our party’s long-time view that the federal government is too big, and spends too much.
We’ve made no bones about it here on this page that we wish that President George W. Bush had made significantly more use of his veto pen since his first election to the White House in 2000. Some significant and important vetoes during his first term would have really put the brakes on a lot of the increases in spending that ultimately played a significant role of the GOP’s loss of the majority. The fact that in his first term, the President never used his veto pen, even once, engrains into his legacy a lot of largesse and government growth. In an extensive post-election survey taken by the Club for Growth, one of Washington’s most respective and effective anti-spending organizations, it was clear that in a large measure Congressional Republicans were no longer being identified by GOP voters as standing for less spending and fiscal prudence.
As we approach the final year of Bush’s Presidency, he is apparently found a willingness to use his veto pen, perhaps the party of Hillary being in control of Congress has helped Bush find a reservoir of fiscal prudence that had been hiding in the Roosevelt room. I was very pleased to see the President’s veto of the abhorrently fat and bloated Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). The President’s request for funding on this bill came in just shy of $5 billion, which already seems a vast number. But before Senate and Congressional Appropriators were done larding it up, the bill overwhelming passed out of Congress with a staggering and amazing $23 billion price tag! Wait, before you lay the blame for this monstrosity of pork at the feet of Nancy Pelosi and her ilk, you should know that this bill passed the Congress on a lopsided 381-40 vote, and the Senate on a vote of 80-12.
**There is more – click the link**
November 5th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Correction – WRDA is an authorizing bill, not an appropriations bill. Therefore, it was “larded up” by the House T&I and Senate EPW committees. Appropriators get their shot in the next step of the process – doling out the dough. While I agree that coming out of conference with more than going in is ridiculous, this bill has sat for over six years with no action. Since that time we’ve had Katrina, Midwest flooding and Minnesota bridge collapse. This only fueled the fire by the current Majority to do something. A sustained veto would be nice, but members will vote for infrastructure, jobs and commerce.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:00 am
Thanks Jason, yet another one of those posts by those who know very little about Federal legislation. Glad you’re still around to educate!!