Senate reverses Bush's budget cuts

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON - Senate Democrats on Tuesday reversed President Bush's cuts to education, health research and grants to local communities as they gird for Bush's first-ever veto of a regular appropriations bill.

By a 75-19 vote, the Senate gave bipartisan approval to a huge health and education spending bill that will likely be the first of the fiscal 2008 spending bills Democrats will ship to the White House to start a veto battle involving the budget for almost every domestic agency.

It promises to be a protracted battle, and Bush has a decided advantage, but Democrats have seized on the massive health and education measure as the best measure with which to challenge Bush and his GOP allies in Congress. The measure totals over $600 billion and reverses a raft of cuts sought by Bush to health research, special education and funding for grants to community groups that help the poor, among others.

The confrontation with Bush over domestic programs — many of which are also popular with Republicans, as demonstrated by the margin of passage — will come on the heels of the bruising veto battle over a children's health insurance bill. Programs funded by the health and education bill affect schoolchildren, workers, the poor and disabled, the unemployed and those with special needs or drug and alcohol problems, among others.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071024/ap_on_go_co/budget_battle

[baldguy]

1. The 'pubs will cry & the Dems will cave.

Just wait.

[Enrique]

6. a lot of republicans voted with the dems on this

75-19 vote.

[Maraya1969]

9. Isn't that over 2/3? What am I missing?

[Robbien]

2. Bush only has the decided advantage

since Congress allows him to have it.

When the situation was reversed, the GOPer Congress didn't allow the Democratic President one inch.

[CoffeeCat]

3. No doubt...

Remember the 103rd Congress, led by Gingrich?

They took the bull by the horns, orchestrated a press conference on the Capitol
Steps and declared that they had a mandate from the American people. They frickin
stood up for every perverse point on their "Contract With America" and they marketed
their swill as if it was a fine wine.

They never backed down. They bullied the President. They were like rabid junkyard
dogs and they would insult the President if he disagreed with them.

No matter what side of the political fence we are on---we never use our spines. We
constantly allow the Republicans to mow over us.

We have a majority. The pResident has a 25 percent approval rating. Why don't they
stand up and stand tall?

They're all a bunch of wussies and I'm really getting sick of it.

[Enrique]

7. the Gingrich Congress set a record in opposing the President

the Pelosi Congress shattered that record

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20070904/pl_cq_politics/bushsuccessratingathistoriclow

Bush Success Rating at Historic Low

President Bush’s success rating in the Democratic-controlled House has fallen this year to a half-century low, and he prevailed on only 14 percent of the 76 roll call votes on which he took a clear position.



The previous low for any president was in 1995, when Bill Clinton won just 26 percent of the time during the first year after Republicans took control of the House. If Bush’s score holds through the end of the year, he will have the lowest success rating in either chamber for any president since Congressional Quarterly began analyzing votes in 1953.



A study of House and Senate floor votes, compiled by CQ over the August recess, also showed that House Democrats have backed Bush’s legislative positions this year only 6 percent of the time, making for the strongest opposition from either party against a president in the 54 years CQ has kept score.



(...)

[Toots]

10. Sounds good but what is the reality of it

What have Democrats done? Where is health care, where is the end to the war, where is accountability for the crimes committed, where is fixing our infrastructure, What exactly have they defeated Bush* on??

[CreekDog]

11. Nope, they didn't get the whole contract passed, sorry no cigar

And second, why don't you use facts instead of the made up straw men you just posted.

The Dems have the votes to get stuff through, to get it through veto-proof requires the votes of Republicans. It fails when Republicans don't vote with Dems.

SCHIP? Not enough House Republicans supported it to get it through. The few Dems that opposed it made no difference in passage against a veto, Republicans were needed to pass things.

I just hate the loose play with the facts to back up your screeds.

You don't like what isn't moving forward in Congress, fine, don't like it, but don't lie about precisely why things are not passing. Here we have a 75-19 vote and you are running it down.

Frankly, you deserve the congress you get, but I don't.

[CoffeeCat]

12. Wow, I can almost hear the venom...

...spewing from your eyes.

Ya sure are angry there, fella.

Maybe switching to decaffeinated would be a wise choice.

:eyes:

[CreekDog]

13. Inaccurate and unfair criticism fires up my protective nature

If someone comes after you and they lie about you, I'll be in your corner.

;)

[robinlynne]

8. That's how I remember it.

[rodeodance]

4. umm. they have more than enough for a veto override.

[rodeodance]

5. looks like the HOUSE might give this bill trouble:

Bush is intent on issuing vetoes and has so far rebuffed Democratic pleas for negotiations. But Democrats and some Republicans hope that once he gets a few vetoes out of his system, the White House will signal a willingness to compromise.

For starters, much of the additional money goes to restore White House cuts. Many of those cuts were rejected by Republicans when they controlled Congress.

House Republicans have demonstrated they have the votes to sustain Bush vetoes, though on some votes, including the House version of the health and education bill, they barely produced the more-than-one-third required.

Some lawmakers predict the president will be unyielding and the battle could drag into next year.

"I don't see it getting worked out. I really don't," predicted Rep. Tom Latham, R-Iowa, a senior member of the Appropriations Committee.

[flamingyouth]

14. kick

[hedgetrimmer]

15. Senate reverses Bush's cuts to education, health

Source: Chronicle

Oct. 24, 2007, 1:08PM
Senate reverses Bush's cuts to education, health


By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats on Tuesday reversed President Bush's cuts to education, health research and grants to local communities as they gird for Bush's first-ever veto of a regular appropriations bill.

By a 75-19 vote, the Senate gave bipartisan approval to a huge health and education spending bill that will likely be the first of the fiscal 2008 spending bills Democrats will ship to the White House to start a veto battle involving the budget for almost every domestic agency.

It promises to be a protracted battle, and Bush has a decided advantage, but Democrats have seized on the massive health and education measure as the best measure with which to challenge Bush and his GOP allies in Congress.

The measure totals over $600 billion and reverses a raft of cuts sought by Bush to health research, special education and funding for grants to community groups that help the poor, among others.



Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5239904.html

---

Well, you know, somewhere somebody got their sh*t together... and Bush, I guess the phrase, "bring it on" is coming back to haunt you in ways you did not imagine... wish it was more.

[gateley]

16. Good! The first of many such reversals I hope. nt

[hedgetrimmer]

18. Me too! n/t

[appleannie1]

17. I like to see this

Democrats voting Yes

Akaka, Hawaii; Baucus, Mont.; Bayh, Ind.; Bingaman, N.M.; Boxer, Calif.; Brown, Ohio; Byrd, W.Va.; Cantwell, Wash.; Cardin, Md.; Carper, Del.; Casey, Pa.; Conrad, N.D.; Dorgan, N.D.; Durbin, Ill.; Feingold, Wis.; Feinstein, Calif.; Harkin, Iowa; Inouye, Hawaii; Johnson, S.D.; Kerry, Mass.; Klobuchar, Minn.; Kohl, Wis.; Landrieu, La.; Lautenberg, N.J.; Leahy, Vt.; Levin, Mich.; Lincoln, Ark.; McCaskill, Mo.; Menendez, N.J.; Mikulski, Md.; Murray, Wash.; Nelson, Fla.; Nelson, Neb.; Pryor, Ark.; Reed, R.I.; Reid, Nev.; Rockefeller, W.Va.; Salazar, Colo.; Schumer, N.Y.; Stabenow, Mich.; Tester, Mont.; Webb, Va.; Whitehouse, R.I.; Wyden, Ore.
Democrats not voting

Biden, Del.; Clinton, N.Y.; Dodd, Conn.; Kennedy, Mass.; Obama, Ill.
Republican voting Yes

Alexander, Tenn.; Bennett, Utah; Bond, Mo.; Chambliss, Ga.; Cochran, Miss.; Coleman, Minn.; Collins, Maine; Craig, Idaho; Crapo, Idaho; Dole, N.C.; Domenici, N.M.; Grassley, Iowa; Hagel, Neb.; Hatch, Utah; Hutchison, Texas; Isakson, Ga.; Lott, Miss.; Lugar, Ind.; McConnell, Ky.; Murkowski, Alaska; Roberts, Kan.; Shelby, Ala.; Smith, Ore.; Snowe, Maine; Specter, Pa.; Stevens, Alaska; Sununu, N.H.; Voinovich, Ohio; Warner, Va.
Republicans voting No

Allard, Colo.; Barrasso, Wyo.; Brownback, Kan.; Bunning, Ky.; Burr, N.C.; Coburn, Okla.; Corker, Tenn.; Cornyn, Texas; DeMint, S.C.; Ensign, Nev.; Enzi, Wyo.; Graham, S.C.; Gregg, N.H.; Inhofe, Okla.; Kyl, Ariz.; Martinez, Fla.; Sessions, Ala.; Thune, S.D.; Vitter, La.
Republicans not voting

McCain, Ariz.
Independents voting Yes

Lieberman, Conn.; Sanders, Vt.

[gateley]

19. LIEBERMAN voted yes??? I must be high. nt

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

26. Yeah, sucks that he's not living up to the demonization of him, eh? n/t

[Hulk]

20. They ought to submit and have every spending measure settled before they send another Iraq funds bil

Put the monkey on his back. Demand to settle all the other budget items before the politically charged Iraq war budget is sent to the WH.

[usregimechange]

21. Anyone know if LIHEAP is included in this?

[pingzing58]

22. Of course he wants money for war to protect his financial interests! But for the poor?

[MADem]

23. Ain't that grand! nt

[fightindonkey]

24. I'm Shocked! WELL DONE!

[acmavm]

25. Fantastic! Now they have to stand their ground and fight.