HOUSE - WHITE HOUSE TEAM UP AGAINST SENATE TO CONTROL SPENDING

House Policy Committee ^ | June 28, 2002

[ReleaseTheHounds]

More than 145 Representatives—more than enough to sustain a Presidential veto—have pledged to uphold a veto of supplemental spending legislation that busts the budget, House Policy Chairman Christopher Cox (R-CA) announced today.

“The Senate’s failure to pass a budget has left it to the House and to the President to take more responsibility to control spending,” Chairman Cox said. “Our pledge lets President Bush and our conferees know that they have full authority to save taxpayers billions of dollars. It creates a House-White House alliance in support of the bipartisan House bill, approved 280-138 on May 24.”

The Senate remains unwilling to make tough spending decisions—the latest example being a prescription drug bill more than double the size of the just-passed House bill. A House-Senate conference on the supplemental spending bill is expected the week of July 8, after Congress returns from the Independence Day District Work Period.

The text of the letter to control spending and a list of signatories follow:

Dear Mr. President:

To win the War on Terrorism and sustain economic growth, the federal government must control spending.

To this end, we will sustain your veto of any supplemental appropriation legislation that:

· Requires that you spend in excess of $27.1 billion, the amount of emergency 2002 supplemental spending you requested; or

· Provides less than you requested to win the War on Terrorism, or to rebuild New York.

The bill passed by the House on May 24 by a vote of 280-138 meets these criteria. We write to show our strong support for holding the line on excessive government spending.

Sincerely,

1. W. Todd Akin 2. Dick Armey 3. Spencer Bachus 4. Richard Baker 5. Cass Ballenger 6. Bob Barr 7. Roscoe Bartlett 8. Joe Barton 9. Charles Bass 10. Judy Biggert 11. Michael Bilirakis 12. Roy Blunt 13. John Boehner 14. Mary Bono 15. John Boozman 16. Kevin Brady 17. Henry Brown 18. Dan Burton 19. Ed Bryant 20. Steve Buyer 21. Ken Calvert 22. Dave Camp 23. Chris Cannon 24. Eric Cantor 25. Steve Chabot 26. Saxby Chambliss 27. Howard Coble 28. Mac Collins 29. John Cooksey 30. Christopher Cox 31. Phil Crane 32. Ander Crenshaw 33. Barbara Cubin 34. John Culberson 35. Tom Davis 36. Jim DeMint 37. Lincoln Diaz-Balart 38. David Dreier 39. John Duncan 40. Jennifer Dunn 41. Phil English 42. Jeff Flake 43. Ernie Fletcher 44. Mark Foley 45. Randy Forbes 46. Elton Gallegly 47. Greg Ganske 48. George Gekas 49. Jim Gibbons 50. Paul Gillmor 51. Ben Gilman 52. Virgil Goode* 53. Bob Goodlatte 54. Porter Goss 55. Lindsey Graham 56. James Greenwood 57. Sam Graves 58. Mark Green 59. Felix Grucci 60. Gil Gutknecht 61. James Hansen 62. Melissa Hart 63. Doc Hastings 64. J.D. Hayworth 65. Joel Hefley 66. Wally Herger 67. Van Hilleary 68. Pete Hoekstra 69. Stephen Horn 70. John Hostettler 71. Amo Houghton 72. Kenny Hulshof 73. Duncan Hunter 74. Henry Hyde 75. Darrell Issa 76. William Jenkins 77. Sam Johnson 78. Tim Johnson 79. Walter Jones 80. Ric Keller 81. Mark Kennedy 82. Brian Kerns 83. Mark Kirk 84. Ron Lewis 85. John Linder 86. Frank Lucas 87. Don Manzullo 88. Scott McInnis 89. John Mica 90. Gary Miller 91. Jeff Miller 92. Jerry Moran 93. Sue Myrick 94. Charlie Norwood 95. Jim Nussle 96. Tom Osborne 97. Doug Ose 98. C.L. Butch Otter 99. Michael Oxley 100. Ron Paul 101. Mike Pence 102. Thomas Petri 103. Chip Pickering 104. Joe Pitts 105. Todd Russell Platts 106. Richard Pombo 107. Rob Portman 108. Deborah Pryce 109. Adam Putnam 110. George Radanovich 111. Jim Ramstad 112. Tom Reynolds 113. Bob Riley 114. Mike Rogers 115. Dana Rohrabacher 116. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen 117. Ed Royce 118. Paul Ryan 119. Jim Ryun 120. Jim Saxton 121. Bob Schaffer 122. Edward Schrock 123. Pete Sessions 124. John Shadegg 125. Christopher Shays 126. Clay Shaw 127. John Shimkus 128. Bill Shuster 129. Rob Simmons 130. Chris Smith 131. Nick Smith 132. Mark Souder 133. Cliff Stearns 134. Charles Stenholm 135. Bob Stump 136. John Sullivan 137. John Sununu 138. Thomas Tancredo 139. Billy Tauzin 140. Lee Terry 141. Bill Thomas 142. Mac Thornberry 143. Patrick Tiberi 144. Patrick J. Toomey 145. Fred Upton 146. David Vitter 147. Greg Walden 148. Curt Weldon 149. Dave Weldon 150. Jerry Weller 151. Joe Wilson

*Concurring letter

[Deb]

The "guy" Nixon appointed is a Democrat who was pushed on Nixon by California Commie Alan Cranston when the Dems controlled Congress.

[hchutch]

Yeah, I wonder why they are like that. They just don't understand that our guys do our principles no good if they lose elections. What will it take for them to understand that?

[SteamshipTime]

Linda's point, which is apparently beyond your ability to grasp unless it's spelled out, is that with Gore as President and a Republican-controlled House, he would not have been able to spend near the money that Bush has. Republicans, including the Senate, would reflexively oppose over half this spending if the president were a Democrat.

[perez24]

Go Roscoe (Bartlett R-MD) Go!!!!!

[Linda Liberty]

And running off to be a third-party sunshine patriot, merely handing the Demcorats the keys to put more of these activists in is going to make the situation better in what way?

For one thing it would punish the pubbies for their profligate ways, which would have the immediate effect of making them behave better. We'd be a lot better off if they had principles, even if they were in the minority.

And I happen to believe that if the pubbie voters stood up for principle, their politicians would shortly not only be more principled, but would be a big majority as well. Playing the rat game not only is bad for the country, its bad politics, because the pubbies can't outpromise a rat. Its more important that they learn that than that they be in power, and it appears the only way they're going to learn it is another stretch in the back rows.

None of the justices you name is great in my view, although I agree there are worse alternatives. But Dem's appoint decent judges some of the time too, and if I recall correctly the senate that confirmed Thomas was democrat majority (am I forgetting?)

[SteamshipTime]

What a brilliant strategy:

Slap tariffs on steel and lumber, just like Democrats.

Enact minor tax cuts (like Clinton's cut for capital gains on principal residences) knowing people are too stupid to realize that FICA and various excise taxes, and tariffs which are paid by consumers, have been raised, just like Democrats.

Enact Campaign Finance Reform, just like Democrats.

Increase agriculture subsidies, just like Democrats.

Increase education spending, just like Democrats.

Add yet another Cabinet-level agency (the one proposed by Al Gore in 1995), just like Democrats.

Communicate to the UN that the official US position is that human activity does contribute to global warming, then quietly decline to withdraw the report and cynically blame someone else for the mess, just like Clinton, I mean, like Democrats.

Endlessly pander to various minority groups, just like Democrats.

Commit U.S. tax dollars to saving the world, just like Democrats.

Throw enough crumbs to your conservative wing to sucker just enough people to believe you are morally relevant, just like Democrats.

Brilliant stuff. Must have been why Bush enjoyed such a landslide victory in 2000.

[Linda Liberty]

Absolutely, and that's not just a theory. We've seen
it over
the last decade in the statehouses as well as at the
federal level. Give Republicans control and they'll
outspend a divided government with Democrat executive
every time.

[AAABEST]

You are never satisfied, encouraged or insightful. Amazing. You must enjoy gloom, you're so good at speading it.

I thought I made it clear to you last night that I don't give half a crap what you think?

I didn't know you from a cow pie until you blindsided me with false accusations while I was attempting to have a reasonable discussion with someone else.

You'd be better off pestering those who value the opinion of a shrew who feels that FReepers should be killed for their political views.

[Deb]

BULL!

During August of 2001 I was out of the country, but because I never miss an edition of the Wall Street Journal, they were stacked up in my office till I could get to them. I got to them a week ago.

Almost everyday, for the month of August, leading up to 9/11 the WSJ ran articles (not editorials) about the fights Bush was engaged in with Congress to:

1. Cut spending.

2. Defund wasteful agencies and programs.

3. Send responsiblities back to the states and away from Washington.

You and the other professional malcontents who spend all your time raising the same tired complaints, are free to do a search and read for yourselves the incredible fights this president waged to control the budget. Of course, you won't do it, you'd rather bash, whine, complain and foam at the mouth with the usual fake outrage.

It gets harder and harder to take you "principled conservatives" seriously...okay, we never did.

[Recovering_Democrat]

PING
FOR
A
REPUBLICAN
PARTY
WITH
BALLS!

[Deb]

Well, at least you're reasonable.

Try to take things a little more seriously (HUGE SARCASM). You obviously don't have a humor gene.

[SteamshipTime]

I get the WSJ too, and I must have missed those articles. I am not aware of a single spending bill he has vetoed. Nor am I aware of a single proposal he has made which would result in a reduction of total federal expenditures or in the number of government agencies. All he's doing is doling out the same dollars to the states and calling it federalism and shuffling the same number (nay, increasing) of federal employees around and calling it re-inventing government (pardon me, that was Clinton and Gore)

In fact, I believe George Bush and a Congressional Republican majority have spent more money and piled up more debt than any previous administration.

You had better stop following the herd, because we are going to wake up one morning to find that not even George Bush can repeal the laws of economics.

[Sabertooth]

I am not aware of a single spending bill he has vetoed.

I believe I heard recently that Bush hasn't vetoed anything to come out of Congress.

[Sir Gawain]

are free to do a search and read for yourselves the incredible fights this president waged to control the budget.

What does it matter if he didn't win those fights? BTW, what exactly did he veto?

[Deb]

Earth to ST...the Republicans do not have a working majority.

Did you take government in school? If so, did you have mono or something?

It doesn't surprise me you "missed" the WSJ articles or maybe you're just blind to anything that doesn't load your cannon.

I'll follow anything I like, since I believe the GOP is our only hope and they should be getting more support...not less. But you're one of them "principled conservatives" who likes to pretend it's better to trash the 200 hard-working Republicans in Congress and stand behind unelectable fringe candidates. Brilliant strategy. The Constitution will wait while third party wackos wallow around in their three ring circuses.

[sultan88]

Our man Randy Forbes (#45) is also on the list.

But Dubyuh has to veto it first!

[SteamshipTime]

Earth to ST...the Republicans do not have a working majority.Then Boy George needs to exercise his veto pen since the Democrats can't override it. And the Republicans need to keep bills holed up in committee.

Did you take government in school? If so, did you have mono or something?Yes and no. And yes, you only argue ad hominem.

It doesn't surprise me you "missed" the WSJ articles or maybe you're just blind to anything that doesn't load your cannon. I'll follow anything I like, since I believe the GOP is our only hope and they should be getting more support...not less. But you're one of them "principled conservatives" who likes to pretend it's better to trash the 200 hard-working Republicans in Congress and stand behind unelectable fringe candidates. Brilliant strategy. The Constitution will wait while third party wackos wallow around in their three ring circuses.

In other words, you're right ST. Bush and the simple GOP majority have spent more money and piled up more debt than ever and I am going to follow them right over the cliff.

[Deb]

So, it doesn't matter that he tried to stop spending and was distracted by a terrorist attack?? Wow, no one can say you "principled conservatives" aren't reasonable.

As you may or may not know, it's pointless to veto something if the Congress can't sustain it. And after 9/11 he needed every vote to try and keep the stinking islamic death squads from killing your ass.

But don't think I don't appreciate the condescending snear that passed as a question. And if you really cared about spending (haha), you'd do what Ron Paul requested on Hugh Hewitt's show, "...elect 30 more Republicans so we can save the country from the Democrats."

But since you obviously don't understand how the Congress and the two-party system works, it's better that you stay out of the fight all together and wait at your computer for the outcome, so you can take safe cheap shots from the sidelines.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Dubyuh has to veto it first!"

Yes, he does!! It's high time he supported this sort of behavior in the conservative caucus within the House.

FReegards...MUD

[habs4ever]

FYI...you can't pile up debt when running a budget surplus.

Also, what's wrong with debt? This could be a trick question.