Bush vetoes bill to restore Everglades

As expected, President Bush today vetoed a bill from Congress that was intended to revive the flagging Everglades restoration effort and help with post-Katrina reconstruction in Louisiana.

Bush Administration officials have said the $23-billion Water Resources Development Act is too expensive. But the bill passed Congress in September by a wide margin --  81-12 in the Senate and 381-40 in the House. That means there were far more votes for the bill than the two-thirds that would be required to override a presidential veto.

As a result, Congress is expected to hand President Bush his first-ever veto override early next week. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House is scheduled to vote on the override Tuesday, and he expects enough Republican support for the override to pass. No date for the Senate vote has been set yet.

“No single bill Congress approves this year will have as much positive impact on Florida’s environment than this," Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., said.

WRDA bills authorize federal spending on water-related projects, usually handing the money to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Normally Congress passes a WRDA bill every two years. But the last one passed in 2000. That was the WRDA bill that authorized launching the Everglades restoration project, then assessed at $8-billion over 20 years.

The Everglades project was supposed to be a 50-50 effort by the state and federal governments. When efforts to pass a new WRDA bill bogged down in unrelated issues, including efforts to reform the Corps, much of the federal funding for Everglades restoration dried up. The state has been carrying much of the financial load, leading to criticism that the state's spending priorities are aimed at supplying water for South Florida's continued growth, and not saving the Everglades.

The bill Bush vetoed also includes $1.9-billion for Louisiana coastal-restoration projects, more than $880-million for a levees and floodwalls to shield some Louisiana parishes from future hurricanes and authorizes spending an unspecified amount of money on fortifying New Orleans' levees to withstand a 100-year storm.

--Craig Pittman and Wes Allison

Comments

Thank god the Democrats took over to return our country to its lost greatness. Beautiful job Democratic party. Even you pissants can't defend them.

Marc the House passed a 14 billion dollar bill and the Senate passed a 15 billion dollar bill, they went to conference and came out with a 23 billion dollar bill. Hello? Anyone there?

This was the right veto.

We need energy independence, even if it means oil derricks in the Everglades. If there is oil there, we need to get it to reduce our dependency on foreign sources.

I have no problem drilling in the Everglades. Why?

1. No one lives there
2. There are only alligators and exotic species there
3. It'll create jobs
4. Any pollution will not affect inhabited areas

I would rather see oil derricks on St Pete beach, than in the Everglades. If it came down to it, oil derricks on St Pete beach won't really affect much. The new ones are quiet and quite unobtrusive.

Maybe we could allow drilling in the Everglades for let's say, 10 years, and then the oil companies could clean up any mess that is a result. That seems to make sense to me. It also gets the private sector to help restore the Everglades. I would hate to have it restored first and then drilled. That would be a waste of money.

Our friends in the other party (Communists) will act as though you are killing a child (born) rather than let there be drilling in the Everglades.

[samuel]

It is obvious this country is almost as divided; when we had our first civil war. 50% for 50% against Bush. He is certainly the great divider.
Clinton got a bj; Bush Fu**** the Middle class over completely.

I personally think we should drill off Key West. Cuba will be drilling just 45 miles to the south. Why shouldn't we drill too. Otherwise the Cubans will suck all the oil out and there will be none left.

Sorry to be so late on this post. I was involved with my own real life issues.
After reading the posts; it is obvious it is Friday, that most posters are already drunk, and that they don't want to debate the issue, but call each other names.
Oh, sorry, that last point is the norm.

This guy spends a gazillion dollars on a disastrous war, but you guys are worried about some measly earmarks in this bill?

Unless there's another bridge to nowhere in this thing, I don't give a rat's patoot what else is in the bill. Override it and clean up the Everglades.

I hope the veto is sustained and have members go back and clean us the bill. It's no wonder the Pelosi Congress has a 11 percent approval rating. I wouldn't be surprised if it drops below 10 percent.

[Issywise]

After seven years of spending the national treasury like a drunk sailor with an unlimited credit card, Bush and the Republicans have decided to posture their party for next years election as "fiscally responsible."

Here's some facts: The national debt stands at $9,082,699,584,522.66, as of the end of September, meaning each of the estimated 303,432,094 American citizens' share of this debt is $29,933.18. A family of four (4) shares $119,704 in federal debt responsibility.

In the 4 years 1997-2001 total federal debt increased $438 billion, last year--a relatively good year for Bush, the debt raised $501 billion.

By the time Republicans gained control of all three branches in 2001, a corner had been turned and surpluses were retiring the debt--a process that could have been completed in six to eight years--freeing 23% of federal expenditures for tax breaks or uses other than paying interest.

Finally, and perhaps most threateningly, when Bush drove the Treasury back into the credit markets the institutions that stepped into keep our government bond prices low were Asian central banks, who consider such sub-market price purchases an investment in keeping the imbalance in trade available to them. We cannot easily quit shipping our purchasing dollars to Asian markets when they can punish us by withdrawal from the government bond market--increasing the cost of borrowing and thereby influencing the entire economy.

Foreign buyers of debt hold 22.7% of the whole. Only borrowing by our own government is greater, at 40.6%; meaning that taxes collected for future known needs--Medicare and Medicaid are being spent for today's government operation. In any reasonable system of accounting, stealing money from ones savings account would not be seen as an investment if it was used to fuel overconsumption.

The Republican Party is no more the party of fiscal responsibility than Brittany Spears is an expert on parenting.

W = Worst President Ever

The Bush clan could care less about the environment. All they care about are the big $$$ campaign contributors. They pay the big bucks so they can clear cut the peoples forests, pollute the air and water and develop every inch of green space there is.