Lindaland
  Global Unity
  Veto threat for water projects too???

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Veto threat for water projects too???
OMG Jay
unregistered
posted September 25, 2007 04:37 PM           Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Senate passes water projects bill despite veto threat

* Story Highlights
* Senate OKs $23 billion in water projects despite White House veto threat
* Legislation passes 81-12; supporters optimistic a veto would be overridden
* Bill would restore hurricane-ravaged Louisiana coast and Florida's Everglades
* Critics question cost, say bill stocked with unneeded pet projects by lawmakers
* Next Article in Politics »

Decrease font Decrease font
Enlarge font Enlarge font

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate, ignoring a veto threat from the White House, has authorized $23 billion in water projects, including work to restore the hurricane-ravaged Louisiana coast and Florida's Everglades.
art.boxer.ap.jpg

Sen. Barbara Boxer, accompanied by Sen. Benjamin Cardin, says the water projects in the bill are necessary.

The measure, which the House of Representatives passed earlier this year, was approved 81-12 Monday. It now goes to President Bush, who threatened a veto after the bill's anticipated cost ballooned by $9 billion as projects were added in negotiations between the House and Senate.

The Senate vote was approved by a veto-proof margin, and the bill's supporters said they are optimistic that if the president rejects the measure, his veto will be overridden by two-thirds vote.

"He knows it's going to be overridden," said Sen. James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, a leading supporter of the widely popular measure that would give a green light -- if money is approved -- to hundreds of water projects in virtually every state.

"These programs are necessary," insisted Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, who rejected arguments by opponents that the legislation is stocked with unneeded pet projects pushed by individual lawmakers.

"This makes a substantial commitment to protecting our nation's wetlands, navigation routes and recreation opportunities. It is crucial to our country's economy," said Boxer at a news conference after the vote.
Don't Miss

* Bush accuses Congress of delays on spending bills
* Bush wields veto threats to thwart Democrats

The legislation authorizes $3.6 billion for major wetlands and other coastal restoration, flood control and dredging projects for Louisiana, a state where coastal erosion and storms have resulted in the disappearance of huge areas of land.

The bill also includes nearly $2 billion for the restoration of the Florida Everglades, and nearly $2 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers to build seven new locks on the upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers.

While these projects may be the most ambitious, the bill would give the go-ahead for hundreds of smaller dredging, wetlands restoration and flood control projects across the country. One senator after another called the projects critical for their respective states.

The Congressional Budget Office in an analysis released Monday said the bill includes projects that if fully funded would cost $11.2 billion over the next four years and $12 billion in the decade after that. It said various projects related to hurricane mitigation in Mississippi and Louisiana, including assuring 100-year levee protection in New Orleans, would total $7 billion over the entire period.

The bill also calls for increased oversight of the Corps, requiring an outside review of water construction projects.

But critics called the bill -- the first water system restoration and flood control authorization passed by Congress since 2000 -- an example of Congress' push to approve lawmakers' pet projects without concern over costs or setting priorities. They said the Army Corps already has a backlog of $58 billion worth of projects and an annual budget of only about $2 billion to address them.

While the bill authorizes projects, it does not fund them.

"How many failed projects and wasted dollars does it take before we finally say we've had enough?" asked Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, who called the legislation a "flawed, loaded bill" that doesn't attempt to set priorities on water projects.

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-South Carolina, complained the bill contains about 20 projects that were added during the negotiations between the House and Senate but were not in the separate bills passed originally.

"The cost has exploded," DeMint complained. The legislation approved originally by the Senate would cost $14 billion, and the House version would cost $15 billion.

Boxer, speaking to reporters before the vote, attributed the cost increase to some projects becoming more expensive, either because of essential changes or inflation. Also, she said, the final version includes necessary projects that had been approved by one chamber, but not the other.

Stephen Ellis, vice president of the Taxpayers for Common Sense, urged Bush to "draw a fiscal line in the sand ... and dare Congress to cross it."

"This bloated bill richly deserves to be stuck by the president's veto pen," Ellis said. E-mail to a friend E-mail to a friend

Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

All About George W. Bush • Barbara Boxer

This ******* just doesn't give one crap about the people an improving their lives. What the hell did he want to be president for...to make us live miserable lives? I hope someone kills that nazi

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/25/water.projects.ap/index.html


IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a