Does Veto Bolster Bush’s Standing?
It’s a bizarre day in Washington when Republicans are divided over a presidential veto of legislation that expands a government run health program and exceeds cost expectations. However, President Bush’s veto today of the bipartisan Children’s Health Insurance Program has proven to be a divisive issue for a party working hard to regain its grip on fiscal responsibility.Most House Republicans along with many outside groups and grassroots efforts that advocate fiscal conservatism are standing by President Bush in the face of unanimous Democratic opposition bolstered by a number of prominent Republicans and a myriad of health and consumer groups.
“The inherent problem on this issue, as on any emotional issue like health care, is it’s almost impossible to counter an emotional issue with a dry budget argument,” said Mike Franc of the conservative Heritage Foundation. “Right now, it’s purely a numbers discussion, and that’s where Republicans have fallen short so far.” Franc acknowledged that Republicans are having a difficult time framing the argument, which is resulting in a public drubbing and easy ad campaigns against vulnerable lawmakers. “It’s the right bill to veto, but it’s not so much about fiscal restraint as it is about the future of health care,” Franc said.
Or, as popular conservative blog www.redstate.com argues today, “While this issue certainly seems like a loser for Bush and congressional Republicans — you can imagine the headline, “Bush Tells Kids to Drop Dead” — it could also work to our advantage. After all, polling done after last year’s elections showed that Republicans had lost their brand on fiscal restraint. It’ll take months, perhaps years, to earn back the trust of voters. Putting a stop to government-run health care, or at least the precursor to it, is a good starting point.”
But that message hasn’t proven to be a rallying point for Republicans. “Every effort was made to bring the administration into the process but they decided to veto the bill, I think, before it was even written,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa), the senior Republican on the Finance Committee. “Now we have to do what we can to try to override.”
Fiscal conservative groups, like Americans for Prosperity, have hailed the Bush administration for vetoing the bill, and the Club for Growth announced last week that it would include the votes on the bill as well as the override effort in its annual congressional scorecard.
Democrats have postponed the veto override vote until Oct. 18, giving them two weeks to try and get the votes to defy Bush’s veto. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.) said the Senate has 69 votes to override the veto, but the House, which must vote first, is less certain.
Democrats largely see the fight as a win-win. If they get the bill through, it will be a major legislative accomplishment and a strike against Bush. And if they can’t muster enough Republican votes to override the veto, they’ve got 13 months to remind voters why the measure failed. “We remain committed to making SCHIP into law—with or without the president’s support,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.
Politically, Democrats believe potentially vulnerable Republicans will be held accountable for standing with President Bush. The House Democrats’ campaign operation is already targeting eight Republicans they hope to unseat in 2008 with a combination radio ad, email, and robo-call campaign this week – all on the children’s health care bill.
MY PERSONAL COMENTARY:
This bill should definitely have been vetoed. It is the Dems latest attempt to start the ball rolling toward national health care (to our detriment.) The Dems statement that 40 million people are without health care may be true if you count the 20 million illegals and those who CHOOSE not to have health insurance even when they can easily afford it. We need national health care through private health insurance carriers. Every man, woman and child needs health insurance paid by the recipients. Too many people can afford luxury items but have opted not to buy health insurance - health care should be budgeted into every household account.
Get married, raise your own children, and pay for your own expenses. I was born in the Depression and my family suffered along with everyone else. BUT WE ALWAYS PAID OUR OWN WAY - “THE AMERICAN WAY.”
Health care is a mess that has been made worse by govt intervention. More intervention will make it worse. Bush is right to veto this. I don’t want Canadian socialist health care. I just want reasonable health insurance. I doubt my rates will go down by having the govt run healthcare but I am sure the quality of care will. Instead, Democrats are using/exploiting children as props in their political games to embarrass a lame-duck president.How dare the Democrats use an emotional issue like children’s health care for political advantage. You can expect in the next year they will be saying “Children’s health! Children’s Health!”
Everyone knows the only acceptible emotional issue is national security. It’s much better to keep repeating “September 11! September 11!”
The veto is appropriate. Wars don’t go on forever; entitlement programs do. Cutting entitlement programs would pay for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with money leftover to boot.
“The inherent problem on this issue, as on any emotional issue like health care, is it’s almost impossible to counter an emotional issue with a dry budget argument,” said Mike Franc of the conservative Heritage Foundation. “Right now, it’s purely a numbers discussion, and that’s where Republicans have fallen short so far.” Franc acknowledged that Republicans are having a difficult time framing the argument, which is resulting in a public drubbing and easy ad campaigns against vulnerable lawmakers. “It’s the right bill to veto, but it’s not so much about fiscal restraint as it is about the future of health care,” Franc said.
Or, as popular conservative blog www.redstate.com argues today, “While this issue certainly seems like a loser for Bush and congressional Republicans — you can imagine the headline, “Bush Tells Kids to Drop Dead” — it could also work to our advantage. After all, polling done after last year’s elections showed that Republicans had lost their brand on fiscal restraint. It’ll take months, perhaps years, to earn back the trust of voters. Putting a stop to government-run health care, or at least the precursor to it, is a good starting point.”
But that message hasn’t proven to be a rallying point for Republicans. “Every effort was made to bring the administration into the process but they decided to veto the bill, I think, before it was even written,” said Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa), the senior Republican on the Finance Committee. “Now we have to do what we can to try to override.”
Fiscal conservative groups, like Americans for Prosperity, have hailed the Bush administration for vetoing the bill, and the Club for Growth announced last week that it would include the votes on the bill as well as the override effort in its annual congressional scorecard.
Democrats have postponed the veto override vote until Oct. 18, giving them two weeks to try and get the votes to defy Bush’s veto. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W.Va.) said the Senate has 69 votes to override the veto, but the House, which must vote first, is less certain.
Democrats largely see the fight as a win-win. If they get the bill through, it will be a major legislative accomplishment and a strike against Bush. And if they can’t muster enough Republican votes to override the veto, they’ve got 13 months to remind voters why the measure failed. “We remain committed to making SCHIP into law—with or without the president’s support,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California.
Politically, Democrats believe potentially vulnerable Republicans will be held accountable for standing with President Bush. The House Democrats’ campaign operation is already targeting eight Republicans they hope to unseat in 2008 with a combination radio ad, email, and robo-call campaign this week – all on the children’s health care bill.
MY PERSONAL COMENTARY:
This bill should definitely have been vetoed. It is the Dems latest attempt to start the ball rolling toward national health care (to our detriment.) The Dems statement that 40 million people are without health care may be true if you count the 20 million illegals and those who CHOOSE not to have health insurance even when they can easily afford it. We need national health care through private health insurance carriers. Every man, woman and child needs health insurance paid by the recipients. Too many people can afford luxury items but have opted not to buy health insurance - health care should be budgeted into every household account.
Get married, raise your own children, and pay for your own expenses. I was born in the Depression and my family suffered along with everyone else. BUT WE ALWAYS PAID OUR OWN WAY - “THE AMERICAN WAY.”
Health care is a mess that has been made worse by govt intervention. More intervention will make it worse. Bush is right to veto this. I don’t want Canadian socialist health care. I just want reasonable health insurance. I doubt my rates will go down by having the govt run healthcare but I am sure the quality of care will. Instead, Democrats are using/exploiting children as props in their political games to embarrass a lame-duck president.How dare the Democrats use an emotional issue like children’s health care for political advantage. You can expect in the next year they will be saying “Children’s health! Children’s Health!”
Everyone knows the only acceptible emotional issue is national security. It’s much better to keep repeating “September 11! September 11!”
The veto is appropriate. Wars don’t go on forever; entitlement programs do. Cutting entitlement programs would pay for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, with money leftover to boot.
entrada de Gekko a las
6:12 a. m.
0 comentarios:
Publicar un comentario
Suscribirse a Enviar comentarios [Atom]
<< Inicio