By Jim Spencer
SpencerSpeaks.com
Democratic U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar calls it “not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.â€
That has become Salazar’s way of dealing with a president who has become as much an obstructionist as an advocate.
Like many in Congress, Salazar has grown willing to take what he can get on certain critical bills, while waiting for a new resident in the White House.
George W. Bush vetoed an expansion of children’s health care for the third time last week. For a guy who never used to veto anything except embryonic stem cell research, the latest State Children’s Health Insurance Program veto was Bush’s seventh this year.
“Every time he does veto something, it ends up hurting the people of
“The problem with the president is that he’s taken the attitude that ‘it’s my way or the highway.’ We share power in this country. There ought not to be only a George Bush way forward.â€
The latest casualty of the President’s intransigence was the renewable electricity standard. That would have required utility companies to produce 15 percent of electrical power from renewable sources. In a nod to power companies, the White House threatened to veto an energy bill that included such a requirement, and the Senate backed down.
“With a different president we’ll get a different standard,†Salazar reasoned.
The take-what-you-can approach only increases frustration among Democrats in Congress. But it is too soon to say how frustrated the voters are by Bush’s tactics.
“With these vetoes, the President is playing politics with real, pocket-book issues for the hardworking people in the middle here in
And yet Congress continues to cave to the president’s vetoes and veto threats.
Republicans refuse to provide enough votes to override Bush’s actions, gambling that standing with the president against domestic programs won’t hurt their chances for reelection.
Those who are not standing for reelection have nothing to lose. So you hear this from outgoing Colorado Republican Sen. Wayne Allard:
“I am a strong supporter of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, and want the program to cover all uninsured, lower-income children. “The (new) SCHIP legislation … includes frivolous spending, expands coverage to children already covered by private insurance and neglects the original intent of the program to provide health coverage for low-income children. While I support the reauthorization of SCHIP, I do not support legislation that expands the program and serves as an initial step towards government-run health care.â€
Republican Representatives Marilyn Musgrave, Doug Lamborn and Tom Tancredo did not respond to requests for comment about the impact of Bush’s string of vetoes. But Musgrave, who faces a significant challenge from former Salazar staffer Betsy Markey in the 4th Congressional District has twice voted to uphold the president’s veto of expanded children’s health care and will likely have to cast a third vote as the election season begins in earnest. Although challenged within his own party, the district Lamborn represents is safely Republican, which means nothing the president vetoes can really hurt the GOP candidate.
Tancredo, like Allard and Bush, is a lame duck. But his successor will almost certainly be a conservative Republican.
Nevertheless, gridlock and stalled budgeting looms as an issue in every Congressional race in
One of the president’s recent vetoes targeted a domestic appropriations bill that included $150.7 billion in school aid, health care and other programs.
That obstruction will likely lead to what’s called an “omnibus†budget bill that blends these vital domestic programs with others that Bush dares not veto.
These days, with this president, that seems like the only way to get people what they need.
Copyright 2007 by Jim Spencer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
3 users commented in " Vetoes Leave Congress Settling for “Good,” Not “Perfect” "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackSo “Terrible Tommy Tancredo” will no doubt be succeeded by a conservative Republican. That may not be so bad — if the conservative Republican has any interest in representing his/her district, something no one can accuse Terrible Tommy of doing.
But I digress. Frankly, I’m tired of hearing Salazar and other Democrats whine about GWB and his irrational vetoes, blaming Republicans for not providing the votes to override Bush. These guys are so corrupted by the system that all a Republican Senator has to do is utter the word “filibuster” and they all pack up a day early and go home. Whatever happened to taking up the challenge? Let them filibuster. Let them read the phone book and recipe books while standing on their feet round the clock, the way filibusters always have been conducted. At least the American people would see first hand who the obstructionists are. This Casper Milquetoast approach of the Democrats contributes to voter distrust and disgust with the ineffective Democrats who supposedly control Congress. As is said during a real filibuster periodically to make sure the filibusters stay and fight the fight instead of packing it in and going home: Mr. Chairman, I detect the lack of a quorum.
Finslly Sen. Salazar has realized the “my way or the highway” attitude of Bush. What took him so long?
Forget renewable energy I guess, let’s keep selling that oil, although D.C. does not seem to be short on wind.
Sen. Allard has government-subsidized health care himself, why does he want to deny it to others?
We simply can’t wait until after Jan. 2009 to get health care to children and adults who don’t have health insurance!
We must forget abt. taking down the HMO’s and Drug Cos. and start “Budget HMO” now, for anyone who doesn’t have health insurance, period. If Medicare can do it for $100 mo., why can’t “Budget HMO”?
If we can’t get tax money, “Budget HMO” needs a start-up philanthropic backer, perhaps Ted Turner or Bill Gates have a few billion they don’t want to pay taxes on this year? It is evil for us to continue to deny people health care or have them go bankrupt.
Well, Wildflower, I am inclined to agree with you, or at least with where you want to go on healthcare. Do not forget, though, that Medicare is spending far more than it takes in each year, and absent some pretty significant changes reasonably soon, will become a great drain on the federal budget. As we have discussed in other message threads, there is no such thing as a free lunch. We Americans have to decide what it is we want (and what it is that we are willing to do without) and how much we are prepared to pay for it. I am on Medicare (traditional Medicare, where I get to choose my own doctors, etc.) and I thank my fellow taxpayers for having subsidized me through some major medical problems the past few years. I know my taxes while working and paying into SS and Medicare, and my monthly premiums do not begin to cover the cost of major medical procedures.
Leave A Reply