Senate Approves Huge Spending Bill After Democrats' Delay

The New York Times ^ | January 22, 2004 | DAVID STOUT

[jgrubbs]

WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 — The Senate gave President Bush and his Republican allies a victory today by approving an $820 billion spending bill covering more than a dozen federal departments and agencies in the fiscal year that began almost four months ago.

The vote was 65 to 28. But that vote was anticlimactic, in a sense, because minutes earlier the chamber had voted, 61-32, to end a delay, or filibuster, that had blocked the measure. The 61 votes were one more than needed to defeat the filibuster.

The bill, approved by the House weeks ago, was a conspicuous item of unfinished Senate business over the holiday recess. On Tuesday, Senate Republicans fell 12 votes short of the 60 needed to block the filibuster, when only 48 senators voted to cut off debate.

"Our desire isn't to kill this bill," Senator Tom Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota, the minority leader, told reporters after the Tuesday vote. "Our desire is to give them a chance to fix it."

Republicans said, in effect, that there was nothing to fix. "We are not changing this bill, period," said Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, the third-ranking Republican in the Senate.

Mr. Daschle conceded after Tuesday's roll call that he did not expect the filibuster to endure and that final passage would come before February. In anticipation of today's vote, a number of Democrats said they had made their point.

Democrats objected to provisions they said will allow the Bush administration to threaten the overtime pay of millions of workers; relax media ownership rules; and delay a requirement that supermarket meat and produce carry labels identifying them by country of origin. The meatpacking industry and the major organization representing cattlemen oppose the labels.

"Take it or leave it," Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said angrily today in describing the Republicans' attitude. "This is one senator who's going to leave it because of what it will do to working families and women and veterans of this country."

Republicans had said that if Democrats continued to block the $820 billion bill (which includes Social Security and Medicare), then they would push through a resolution financing the affected departments and agencies at last year's levels.

That could have had serious repercussions, not only in the vast federal bureaucracy but for individual lawmakers, many of whom have to run this year.

Line-by-line scrutiny of huge spending bills almost invariably turns up instances of special-interest items, some with civic benefits, virtually all meant to burnish the images of the legislators, Democrats and Republicans alike, with their local constituents.

Three Republican senators, Olympia J. Snowe of Maine, Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado and John S. McCain of Arizona, sided with the Democrats on Tuesday. Mr. McCain had complained that the bill was studded with special-interest, pork-barrel spending. "It's hard to pick the ugliest pig in this sty," he said.

Ugly or not, the bill cleared the Senate this afternoon. Many of the lawmakers have acknowledged that the election season will require much of their attention and energy. And before long, President Bush will send them his proposed budget for the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1.

[jgrubbs]

I wish I could take credit for the list, but I just found it and did a copy and paste, I have found other items in the bill that didn't make it to the list yet.

[God is good]

That's even better 315Gs divided by 11 is 28Gs each.

[CholeraJoe]

They're in 12 states. That makes it a Federal issue under the commerce clause.

[God is good]

Maybe someone could post a list of Bush's recent spending programs.

[CholeraJoe]

Using that logic, should regulation of prescription drugs be left to the states and the FDA abolished?

[meandog]

"Real" Bush giving SOTU speech as he goes over spending bill!

[CSM]

Then this money is a waste anyway. The amount per state isn't enough to pay for the beaurocrats that will be involved. By the way, since when does the natural migration of insects fall under commerce?

[CSM]

"Using that logic, should regulation of prescription drugs be left to the states and the FDA abolished?"

Yes. You would certainly see a decrease in the cost of perscription drugs.

[jgrubbs]

Maybe someone could post a list of Bush's recent spending programs.

Do you have a copy of his State of the Union speech?

My favorite is the "millions" for the "no child left behind" to make sure kids can read by middle school, and now the new millions for the new "program" to help the middle school and high school students that the "no child left behind" didn't help.

[Krodg]

$180,000 Seafood waste research, Fairbanks, Alaska

That's a lot of money just to ask Johnny why he didn't clean his plate.. :(

[Fester Chugabrew]

. . . virtually all meant to burnish the images of the legislators . . .

I like THAT one.

[jgrubbs]

"By passing the No Child Left Behind Act, you have made the expectation of literacy the law of our country. We're providing more funding for our schools -- a 36-percent increase since 2001. We're requiring higher standards. We are regularly testing every child on the fundamentals. We are reporting results to parents, and making sure they have better options when schools are not performing. We are making progress toward excellence for every child in America."

"So tonight, I propose a series of measures called Jobs for the 21st Century. This program will provide extra help to middle and high school students who fall behind in reading and math, expand advanced placement programs in low-income schools, invite math and science professionals from the private sector to teach part-time in our high schools."

--George W. Bush

[rintense]

This is one senator who's going to leave it because of what it will do to working families and women and veterans of this country."

Is anyone else tired of this one-trick pony phrase?

[jgrubbs]

I thought "No Child Left Behind Act" was supposed to make sure students don't fall behind in reading and math.

Now we are going to have the "Jobs for the 21st Century" to "provide extra help to middle and high school students who fall behind in reading and math".

[CholeraJoe]

By the way, since when does the natural migration of insects fall under commerce?

When they cross state lines. That's why I have to buy a migratory waterfowl stamp from the Department of the Interior to shoot Daffy and friends.

There's nothing natural about these termites, they are a non-native species.

[atlaw]

From the Heritage Foundation, concerning the curent omnibus bill: “[T]he number of pork projects skyrocketed from under 2,000 five years ago to 9,362 in the 2003 budget. Total spending on pork projects has correspondingly increased to over $23 billion.”

But, but .... its republican pork, see .... so its good pork. Not like that nasty democrat pork.

[CSM]

To put the entire budget in context these are the numbers:

Fiscal year 2004 = $2.2 Billion (Whitehouse home page)
Number of tax payers 2001 = 128 Million (Rush Limbaugh)
My guess at an adjustment to # of taxpayers = 140 Million
2.2B/140M=$15,714 per tax payer.

Of course we all know that 50% of the adult population does not pay taxes. The reality is that each adult in America is responsible for $7,857. Talk about a divided country. Those that pay vs. those that mooch.

Now, we have also seen the story about $20,000 per household is the projected spending. 45% of that is defense. That leaves us a gap that is indicative of the weighted taxing on the wealthy, potential investors. The 45% is clearly constitutional, so that should really give all adults a burden of $3,535. At the same rate of population that pays today that would give a burden to each taxpayer of $7,071. Let's get back to the constitution and give us a 55% Federal Tax cut!

[plain talk]

Great! I feel better now. LOL! Seriously, this list makes me want to hurl - big time. $2M for "Tools for Tolerance"?

[wjcsux]

But, but .... its republican pork, see .... so its good pork. Not like that nasty democrat pork.
Thanks! I feel better now.

[CSM]

Commerce involves items that hinder commercial trade. Not the expanded version of anything that "crosses" state lines. Read the constitution and you would see why this is not a federal issue. Neither is the requirement to purchase a waterfowl stamp from the Feds. What next, purchasing gun liscenses from the Feds because you could potentially transport a gun over a state ling?

Why should the people in Alaska or Maine care about your bug problem? They should be concerned with their own problems without expecting you to help them financially.