by D. Cupples Many busy people skim newspaper headlines and form opinions based on them. This can be problematic when editors slap titles onto articles that don't truly reflect what the articles say. It's like the traffic light is green, while the camera reads red and snaps a photo your license plate, so you get ticketed for running the red.
Today's Washington Post titled an article, "Democrats Bow to Bush's Demands in House Spending Bill," then the article proceeds to list a number of provisions that House Dems put into the bill that President Bush dislikes enough to threaten a veto.
Granted, House Dems did remove $22 billion in domestic spending, because Bush threatened to veto the entire appropriations bill if they didn't. What would have happened if Dems had left the $22 billion?
The bill would likely die. It would go to the Senate, where Republicans would likely filibuster, thereby requiring 60 votes just to bring the bill to a vote. After years of driving up our nation's debt (now above $9 trillion), Republican politicians now want to call themselves fiscal conservatives.
The problem: the Senate has 49 Democrats and 49 Republicans, and most Republicans still goose step with President Bush. For 11 months, Dems have had the darnedest time trying (and failing) to get 60 votes in the Senate. The upshot: if Dems had kept the $22 billion in it, the appropriations bill likely would have died in the Senate.
I suppose that those who view our nation's budgetary process as a sporting event can score one for President Bush and the loyal Republicans who follow him.
As the oddly titled Washington Post article points out, House Dems did keep a provision in the bill that would revoke tax breaks for huge (and highly profitable) oil companies. Bush hates that provision.
House Dems want to revoke oil company tax breaks to pay for higher automotive fuel-efficiency standards and create tax incentives for renewable-energy research (so that we can one day stop depending on Mid East oil). Bush doesn't like that provision.
House Dems kept a provision that would increase funding for children's health care, nutrition and medical research. Bush doesn't like those provisions, either.
Obviously, congressional Democrats are compromising. What else can they do? Too many Senate Republicans will simply jam up the budgetary process via filibuster if Dems don't compromise.
Memeorandum has other bloggers' reactions: The Newshoggers, Captain's Quarters, The Hill, CNN, Dr. Sanity, Right Voices and New York Times
Other BN-Politics posts:
* Something's Amiss at Gallup: Approval Ratings & Mid East Peace Talks
* Revisiting 1980s Privatization Myths
* Intelligence Chief Misleads Public Again
* White House Whines About Congressional Oversight
Comments