Tuesday, Oct. 2, 2007 | 7:04 a.m.
WASHINGTON - As President Bush issued veto threats this summer over legislation being crafted in Congress that he thought called for too much spending, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters a story.
A one-time pitcher for a Sacramento triple-A baseball team, "Bud Beasley was his name," became infamous for his antics, Reid said. When the team manager tried to take him out of a game, Beasley once laid down on the pitcher's mound. Another time, he threw the ball into the stands.
Eventually, people grew so impatient with the antics that Beasley, who went on to become a legendary coach in Reno, is "the only person in professional baseball who was thrown out of a (game) before it started."
Bush is like Beasley, Reid suggested. "He's talking about vetoing things before we even get to them."
The bills at issue are to pay to run the federal government for the fiscal year that began Monday. Bush has threatened to veto most of the 12 spending bills crafted by the Democratic Congress, none of which has won approval of both houses of Congress.
Bush has not vetoed a single spending bill since taking office, but this is the first year the Democrats have controlled both houses during his presidency.
Stan Collender , a budget expert who writes a column for NationalJournal.com, said appropriations bills usually sidestep partisan battles because there's plenty of pork in the bills to ensure they get support. He doesn't think this year will end up much different.
"Throughout history most appropriations have been somewhat bipartisan," Collender said. "There are enough goodies they can always buy a few votes. It has obviously, like everything else, gotten more partisan in recent years."
If Bush vetoes the bills, Collender ventured, Congress will override many of them "in seconds. You've got members of Congress who no longer see their legacy tied to the president."
A case in point may be Nevada's Rep. Jon Porter, a Republican who voted in favor of six of the disputed bills and could very well vote to override if the legislation remains in a form to his liking. The bills would go to such things as science and for the Commerce, Justice, Education, State, Labor, and Health and Human Services departments.
Porter's spokesman would not say whether the congressman would vote to override a Bush veto. Porter "will continue to support bills that are in the best interests of his district," spokesman Matt Leffingwell said.
Nevada's other Republican House member, Rep. Dean Heller, voted with his party and against those bills.
In the Senate, Republican Sen. John Ensign voted against a bill to fund the Transportation and Housing and Urban Development departments. Ensign's office has said the spending for Amtrak and public housing was excessive, even though the bill contained money for highway projects in Nevada. Much of the Bush administration's displeasure over the Democrats' proposals stems from spending that goes beyond the president's budget.
The Bush administration wanted to keep discretionary spending in its $2.3 trillion budget to $933 billion, which is $60 billion more than the fiscal 2007 budget. The Democratic plan boosts it to $954 billion.
The administration has repeatedly lashed out against earmark spending in the bills. But fiscal watchdog groups note that the House has cut earmarks by 50 percent from last year, and the Senate by 20 percent - something unimaginable a year ago, said Keith Ashdown, chief investigator at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group.
Collender said the $21 billion difference between the president's version and bills being put forward by Congress amount to less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the president's $2.3 trillion budget.
The standoff is the biggest budget impasse since 1995, when President Bill Clinton balked at the bills a conservative Republican Congress put forward. Eventually, money to run the government ran out and Clinton ordered much of the government shut down. Public opinion polls found that most people blamed the Republicans, who lost seats in elections the following year.
This year Republicans have begun criticizing Democrats for failing to get their bills to the president in time for the start of the new fiscal year.
Taxpayers for Common Sense says it wouldn't mind seeing a few vetoes to keep congressional spending in check. But the group is also not convinced Bush will make good on his threats.
Ashdown recalled that Bush threatened vetoes in the past when the Republican-controlled Congress exceeded his recommended spending levels, but did not follow through.
archive
