Congress Unites: First Veto Override for the W. Bush Administration

Congress passed legislation over President Bush’s veto for the first time in his tenure. 

What does this mean? Well, we now know that on some issues, Congress can unite to enact legislation over White House objections. But this bill, a water projects measure, isn’t especially controversial. It provides funding for Army Corps of Engineers navigation, flood-control and environmental restoration projects.

What else does it take for both sides of the aisle to come together and override the president? Well this bill meets a need for water projects in almost every state, provides work for the Army Corps of Engineers – a federal work force that doesn’t cost the states anything, and the bill doesn’t go into effect until an outside group of scientists reviews the projects.

Further, the actual appropriation hasn’t happened yet – just the authorization. What’s the difference between authorization and appropriation? Authorization = writing the law. It gives permission for the programs and for the funding of those programs. Appropriation = cutting the check. Appropriations bills give money to the project.

So, although the bill just authorized funds and didn’t appropriate them, Bush vetoed it because of its $23 billion price tag and because, in his view, it does not give priority to the most urgent corps projects.

What is the Army Corps of Engineers?

The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is made up of approximately 34,600 civilian and 650 military members. The Corps is made up of engineers, scientists and other specialists that work on federal engineering and environmental projects. They are responsible for:

• Planning, designing, building and operating water resources and other civil works projects (Navigation, Flood Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, etc.)
• Designing and managing the construction of military facilities for the Army and Air Force. (Military Construction)
• Providing design and construction management support for other defense and federal agencies. (Interagency and International Services)

Why Congress wants this bill

The water projects measure has something for nearly every state and Congressional district. This fact encouraged most of our representatives, regardless of party affiliation, to make the bill a law.

The measure gives Louisiana Republicans more than $3 billion for major post-Katrina flood control projects. Some of the most expensive projects in the legislation will benefit the Mississippi River, the Florida Everglades, and coastal Louisiana.

Supporters argued that the destruction of Hurricane Katrina underscores the dangers of neglecting flood-control infrastructure -- and that the bill could help avert another catastrophe like New Orleans’.

Sen. David Vitter, R-Louisiana, argued that the bill is crucial for the entire country since it would help jump-start coastal restoration and other major projects to guard against the sort of devastation wreaked by Katrina in 2005.

Cost

The original House bill called for $15 billion, $8 billion less than the final House/Senate agreement or, conference report. Bush complained that the act's costs ballooned after lawmakers stuffed it with pet projects. White House spokeswoman Emily Lawrimore argued that the bill is fiscally irresponsible and falls outside of the scope of the Army Corps’ mission.

But Republicans known as “fiscal conservatives” backing the measure say it does not break the bank since most of the projects in the bill must win a second approval before money is actually set aside for the work.

Even Sen. James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma, usually a staunch supporter of the Bush administration and the ranking Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, helped override the veto. Inhofe added that without regularly enacted water project bills, the Appropriations Committee faces enormous pressure to use the annual spending bills to authorize and fund projects that haven't gone through a full Congressional review.

Supporters noted that Congress has not passed a water projects bill since 2000 and argued that the new law will help address a backlog of overdue infrastructure projects.

Further, the bill establishes an independent review process for most projects that cost $45 million or more. Those reviews would be set up by the National Academy of Sciences or a similar organization. A review would also take place if the governor of an affected state requested it.

Strategy

Analysts say Democrats hope the successful veto override of the water projects bill will set a precedent and show Republicans who are unhappy with the Bush administration that it is acceptable to veto the veto.

What do you think?

About WomenMatter

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don't want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue.

WomenMatter is the place where we can take one issue at a time, match what we do about it every day of our lives to the facts of the bigger system that we all live in and recognize that every idea for making it better has tradeoffs.

WomenMatter is dedicated to engaging women in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update this website several times a week.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.
• To explore our archive of past Jobs, Taxes, and Benefits Issue updates, click here.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women's lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.