Preznit wants U.S. Congress to exercise "funding restraint" -- i.e. fuck the roads, we've got a war on!

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Who cares if it has massive bipartisan support... the preznit sure don't:
Bush Threatens Veto on Highway Bill

2 hours, 5 minutes ago

By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration issued a veto threat again Tuesday against a popular highway bill, saying the president would be likely to reject any legislation that exceeds a White House-set spending ceiling or adds to the deficit.

The administration, in saying the legislation "should exhibit funding restraint," was at odds with many in Congress, including some conservatives, who say the deteriorating state of the nation's roads, bridges and public transport demands more aggressive spending.

The bill currently on the Senate floor, like the House bill passed in March, approves $284 billion over a six-year period for highway, mass transit and safety programs. The White House says anything above that number would subject the legislation to a veto.

It issued a second veto threat Tuesday on any new borrowing that "negatively impacts the deficit."

[...]


The last six-year highway bill expired in September 2003, and White House opposition to Congress' ambitious spending plans has been a main reason for the failure to approve a new program. It has taken six temporary extensions to keep funds flowing to the states, but those extensions do not allow for new projects.

The popularity of the bill was demonstrated when the Senate voted 94-6 on Tuesday to proceed with it. All six voting no were Republicans, several because they said the bill was too expensive.

But the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, James Inhofe, R-Okla., said, "Those of us who are conservatives really believe this is something we should be doing here."

He said that in addition to making roads safer and less congested, the bill could "easily be the biggest jobs bill in the history of America." Supporters frequently quote Transportation Department estimates that every $1 billion in highway spending translates to 47,500 jobs...

Then again, a veto ain't too likely, seeing as how GWB never vetoed a single damn thing that came across his desk in his first term.

Also, building more roads won't do shit for traffic congestion in the long-term...

kingfish, Wednesday, 27 April 2005 00:08 (twenty-one years ago)

They have enough votes to override, so let him veto. (Anything to make the goofiness be even more so there.)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 00:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Why build roads when there's no oil left to power cars that use the roads?

2020: "omg a new road! let's spend $4,500 on a tank of petrol and drive up it"

Autumn Almanac (Autumn Almanac), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 00:14 (twenty-one years ago)

they'll cut the safety and mass transit portion of the bill and it'll go through.

It's been my impression that the feds can lower the amount of highway money and the states will make it up because it's so important to unions and/or business.

teeny (teeny), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 00:30 (twenty-one years ago)

repeal the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, then dubya can cut whatever he wants.

that's what I would say if i were a congresscritter.

Eisbär (llamasfur), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 01:04 (twenty-one years ago)

So how's that new bankruptcy law work out if all yr holdin' is T-bills?

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 01:06 (twenty-one years ago)

"$1 billion in highway spending translates to 47,500 jobs"

Ignoring non-labor costs, doesn't this mean ~$21,000 per job per annum?

Rhodia (Rhodia), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 01:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, that money isn't for wages per se -- it's doled out to corporations and contractors that ostensibly create jobs.

rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 02:00 (twenty-one years ago)

The Republican caucus would never embarass Bush by overriding his veto.

milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Wednesday, 27 April 2005 02:14 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.