[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Bush Demands Action on Surveillance, Pledges Tough Line on Spending in 2008 Bush Demands Action on Surveillance, Pledges Tough Line on Spending in 2008 By Alan K. Ota and David Clarke, CQ Staff President Bush got in the first word Thursday on priorities for 2008, telling Congress to make an overhaul the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act its first order of business. He also warned Democrats that he will continue to oppose spending and tax increases, as well as any weakening of his signature education overhaul. Bush voiced concern at a news conference that Congress failed to complete work on a permanent overhaul of the 1978 surveillance law (FISA — PL 95-511) before adjourning. He urged it to do so before a temporary expansion of domestic surveillance authority (PL 110-55) expires Feb. 1. “The first priority of Congress in the new year will be to pass a good bill and get it to my desk,” Bush said. “It must ensure that intelligence professionals have all the tools they need to keep us safe.” The House on Nov. 15 passed a FISA overhaul bill (HR 3773) that drew a White House veto threat. A Senate bill (S 2248) acceptable to the administration was pulled from the floor earlier this week amid opposition from liberal Democrats and difficulty reaching agreement on floor procedure. A proposed one-month FISA extension was blocked by opposition from the White House and Senate Republicans. Bush said he would take a tough line on fiscal policy again next year. He vowed to stop efforts by Democrats to raise taxes to offset the costs of their domestic priorities, even if that causes more conflict. “I don’t want to undermine the economy by raising taxes,” Bush said. The president expressed satisfaction at forcing Congress to hew to his aggregate budget target in moving a $555 billion fiscal 2008 omnibus spending measure (HR 2764) and a one-year “patch” (HR 3996) to the alternative minimum tax that did not carry revenue-raising offsets. While chastising lawmakers for the delay in clearing the AMT patch, Bush said he would act quickly on the measure. “We will work hard — now that the bill is passed, we will work hard to minimize the impact of the congressional delay so that Americans can get their refund checks as soon as possible,” he said. Bush also is expected to sign the omnibus spending bill but has until Dec. 31 to do so. Congress cleared a continuing resolution Wednesday (H J Res 72) that will keep the government funded through that date. Taking Aim at Earmarks The president took a shot at the amount of earmarks in the bill and said he was directing White House Budget Director Jim Nussle “to review options for dealing with the wasteful spending in the omnibus bill.” Earlier in the year Bush set a goal of cutting the amount and cost of earmarks, often derided as “pork,” in half from their fiscal 2005 levels. The White House budget office later said the fiscal 2005 baseline is 13,492 earmarks costing $18.9 billion. Bush said Congress included 11,900 earmarks in its fiscal 2008 spending bills — the omnibus and the Defense bill (PL 110-116) signed into law Nov. 13. Taxpayers for Common Sense, a group that studies and is critical of earmarks, estimated that the bills include 11,144 earmarks at a cost of $15.3 billion. Earmark tallies vary. The White House and budget watchdog groups usually include funding provisions in their tallies that Congress does not define as earmarks. Neither the House nor Senate Appropriations committees has put out a final tally on fiscal 2008 earmarks, but they have said the cost of such projects has been cut by at least 40 percent from fiscal 2006 levels, or fiscal 2005 in the case of the Labor-HHS-Education bill. It was not clear exactly how the White House will deal with what Bush called “wasteful spending in the omnibus.” But conservatives in Congress, who have made eliminating or greatly reducing earmarks their legislative calling, earlier this year urged the White House to direct federal agencies to ignore earmarks contained in the report language that accompanies spending bills. Most earmarks are detailed in these reports, which are non-binding instructions to agencies. Conservatives, such as Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., argue it is within the power of the administration to ignore these earmark instructions. This would be a bold move, however, and would almost certainly greatly escalate tensions between Congress and the president. Earmarking is a bipartisan tradition in Congress. This was evident earlier this month when members in both parties reacted negatively to a suggestion by House Appropriations Chairman David R. Obey, D-Wis., that earmarks should be taken out of the omnibus and their funds directed to other programs. Also, instructing agencies to ignore earmarks would not reduce expenditures at all. It would simply give the agencies the flexibility to spend the earmarked money as they see fit. Lawmakers argue that they know better what their states and districts need than federal bureaucrats in Washington. “I think we have equal say as to what should be spent in our states,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said earlier this month. “I think that I have as much right — in fact, far more, because I know more — than Jim Nussle has to determine what money should be spent in the state of Nevada. This should not all come from the White House.” The White House also could send Congress a list of funding it believes should be eliminated — or rescinded. Bush could send over a formal rescission proposal, but he cannot compel Congress to act on it. In the fall of 2005 the White House sent over $2.3 billion in rescissions but Congress, then led by Republicans, did not act directly on the package. Some rescissions, however, were included in the fiscal 2006 defense bill (PL 109-148). Election-Year Politics Looking ahead to the campaign season, Bush urged lawmakers to focus on completing legislation quickly after their holiday break. Aside from FISA, Bush mentioned reauthorization of the 2002 No Child Left Behind law (PL 107-110), his signature education initiative, which expires at the end of 2008. But efforts to rewrite that law foundered in the House last month, with Democrats divided among themselves and at odds with the White House and Republicans. Lawmakers are likely to give priority to completing a reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, because bills (HR 4137, S 1642) have passed both chambers and are ready for a conference. “We have a great deal of work in the months ahead,” Bush said. “Next year is an election year. But that does not relieve us of our responsibility to carry out the people’s business. The American people did not elect us to govern in odd years, and campaign in even years. They expect us to get things done.” Bush said the first session of the 110th Congress was beneficial for the country even though both parties had assailed one another for months before a year-end flurry of accomplishments . “I really don’t sit here and say, ‘Well, he won. They lost. Or they won. He lost.’ It’s just not my nature. I think that what ended up happening was good for the country,” he said, citing as an example a bill he signed Wednesday containing the first statutory increase in fuel economy standards in 32 years (PL 110-140). House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., also pointed to the energy bill and the AMT patch, along with “a budget that begins to restore our domestic priorities” as a sign of the Democratic-led Congress’ success. But she rejected Bush’s charge that the Democrats were to blame for delays and the partisan atmosphere which hindered progress on other issues. “Next year, I hope the president will stop trying to block progress and work with Congress to deliver for the American people,” she said. First posted Dec. 20, 2007 11:52 a.m.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Bush says it's urgent to have a new FISA law before the one from last August expires on Feb. 1, and at the same time he opposes the proposed one-month extension of that law from August.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
With the Senate returning on January 22, that leaves them about a week to come up with something. I hope they don't come up with anything.
I fear Reid left so little time so that the shenanigans of last August, when time pressure was used to stampede Congress into passing a bad bill, can be repeated. Whatever Reid's real intentions are, I'm close to sure that that's the plan of the White House and the Senate Republicans.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||