Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate OKs $31.5B Anti-Terror Bill
Associated Press ^ | 7 June 2002 | Alan Fram

Posted on 06/06/2002 9:57:24 PM PDT by PhiKapMom

Senate OKs $31.5B Anti-Terror Bill

By ALAN FRAM
.c The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate gave overwhelming approval early Friday to a counterterrorism bill costing more than $31.5 billion, ignoring a White House veto threat and setting up a politically tinged showdown over the price tag for domestic security.

After four days of debate, senators approved the legislation by 71-22, despite objections by the Bush administration and many Republicans that it was too expensive. The post-midnight vote followed a testy final flurry in which a few dozen amendments were accepted but scores of others were dropped over the angry protests of several senators.

Passage came hours after President Bush announced his proposal to merge federal anti-terror efforts into a Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security and declared that America was waging ``a titanic struggle against terror.''

With that backdrop, Senate Republican leaders decided against dragging debate into next week on a package laden with funds for U.S. troops, airport safety and other popular initiatives. Instead, they will count on upcoming House-Senate negotiations on a final version to pare it or produce a bill that Bush would veto - just as this year's campaigns for congressional control are ramping up.

``Clearly the bill has gotten out of control,'' said Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss, but ``to just drag this out into next week would not be a positive thing.''

Bush proposed a $27.1 billion anti-terror package in March, and the House approved a $29 billion bill in May. The spending is for the remaining months of the federal budget year that ends Sept. 30.

Democrats chided GOP critics of the bill, which mostly contains funds for the military, FBI, efforts to thwart cyber- and bioterrorism, and other responses to the Sept. 11 attacks.

``Tell your people back home they don't need this protection,'' said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. ``Tell them, don't tell us.''

Sens. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, and John McCain, R-Ariz., unsuccessfully offered a series of amendments to underline their point that piggybacked onto the bill were pet projects and other items that were not dire emergencies. They also argued that the Appropriations panel included projects that were scheduled for next year to ease a budget crunch expected then.

Even so, the Senate time and again refused to strip items from the legislation, underlining the Appropriations Committee's power and Congress' long tradition of attaching parochial items to must-pass bills.

By 65-31, the Senate refused to remove language providing $2.5 million for mapping Hawaiian coral reefs. Supporters of the funds said the provision steered money approved last year to an effort to protect endangered ocean life, but Gramm and McCain said the provision showed how some lawmakers were using the bill.

The Senate also rebuffed by 66-30 an effort to remove $2 million to help the Smithsonian Institution plan a storage facility for its animal specimens preserved in 730,000 gallons of flammable alcohol.

Working through a stack of amendments, senators voted 75-19 to forbid U.S. cooperation with the international war crimes tribunal, a permanent court that starts operations next month and has been opposed by the president. The House has approved a nearly identical ban.

The Senate boosted the bill's cost a bit by voting 79-14 for a proposal by Sens. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and Jesse Helms, R-N.C., to double to $200 million the bill's funds for fighting AIDS overseas. A Democratic effort to boost the total to $500 million was rejected 49-46.

Gramm also blocked inclusion of a bipartisan deal reached among some top senators that would have set a cap on next year's spending and set procedures for enforcing that limit. The figure - which excludes benefits such as Social Security - was $768 billion, $9 billion more than Bush proposed and $29 billion higher than is to be spent this year.

Many lawmakers want such an agreement because bipartisan fights have blocked passage of a congressional budget this year that would limit spending. But Gramm and other conservatives want to hold out for a lower figure.

The anti-terror bill contains $5.5 billion to help New York's recovery from the World Trade Center destruction, $200 million for Israel and $50 million for humanitarian aid to Palestinians and $100 million to fight AIDS in poor nations.

But highlighting how the measure would also help local interests, it has $2.5 million for research in Greenport, N.Y., on foot and mouth disease; $73 million for relief from floods in Virginia, West Virginia, Illinois, Michigan and Kentucky; and language directing the Agriculture Department not to carry out Bush's budget proposal to cut federal honey bee research.

06/07/02 00:35 EDT


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government
KEYWORDS: homelandsecurity; porkprojects
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last
To: Wphile
No, I understand. It's best to be cautious based on past history. I'm looking at it like this: he needs the extra money for any improvements to this new cabinet position. I'm sure he'd much rather see the extra money go toward that than the pork products in the current bill. Again, this would be the best case scenario.

So, shall we bet? A margarita for the winner?

21 posted on 06/07/2002 7:33:33 AM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: rintense
A margarita it is!
22 posted on 06/07/2002 7:39:29 AM PDT by Wphile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: rintense
Read the numbers, it is veto proof.

Let me predict what will happen.

The House has passed a bill that is higher than what Bush wanted. The Senate has passed a bill that is even higher yet. Bush has been defeated by Congrss again.

In conference committee they will all work out a compromise which Bush will have to sign and everyone will blame Bush.

23 posted on 06/07/2002 7:45:17 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
How come Bush didn't prevent this < /sarcasm>
24 posted on 06/07/2002 9:50:48 AM PDT by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
I know -- he should have gone right over there and demanded that they not pass this bill! LOL!!!!!!!
25 posted on 06/07/2002 10:11:46 AM PDT by PhiKapMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Yep, and we will never hear about the compromise from the main line mediots. We will find it on the internet or some foriegn wire. Then we will put it out.

Then, the professional BushWhackers will come out and try to electronically lynch him again. We will stuff them as usual, and the reality will be that GW won again.

Dirty Byrd must have porked up this bill a lot re his comments. I thought that every square inch of W. VA was paved or a National Park by now. If we just gave that money to every citizen of WV directly each year, they would be the richest people in America. However, a lot of rats are in line for that pork. Pork $'s, the main import and economic mainstay of WVA!

26 posted on 06/07/2002 11:52:20 AM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
Don't overlook the fact that there are quite a few Pubs in the pork line also.

As you and I previously discussed, the Senate Dems are still silent on the EPA Climate Report.

27 posted on 06/07/2002 12:06:36 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Those pubs need to be b$tched slapped after the November elections and put on warning, that they too can become unemployed.

You called it re the Rats not wanting to vote on that Climate Report. Their vote could cost them a their jobs this year or in two years, regardless of which way they vote.

28 posted on 06/07/2002 12:15:21 PM PDT by Grampa Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
"Bitchslapped". LOL.
29 posted on 06/07/2002 12:27:39 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-29 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson