President Bush is signing a whopping $286.4 billion transportation bill that lawmakers stuffed with plenty of cash for some 6,000 pet projects back home.
Bush hit the road Wednesday to sign the highway bill into law in Montgomery, Ill., and tour a Chicago-area plant operated by Caterpillar Inc., which makes heavy equipment. It was the second time this week he’s traveled from his Texas ranch to highlight recently passed legislation.
The House and Senate voted overwhelmingly to pass the six-year highway and mass transit legislation just before heading home for a summer break. They left Washington carrying promises of new highway and bridge projects, rail and bus facilities, and bike paths and recreational trails they secured for their states and districts.
Bush had threatened to veto the bill if the final version was too fat for his liking, and it took nearly two years for Congress to reach a compromise the White House would accept.
”There were a number of members of Congress who wanted a $400 billion highway bill,” Al Hubbard, director of the National Economic Council at the White House, said Tuesday in defending the president’s decision to accept the bill even though it was $30 billion more than Bush recommended.
”Because of this president, it is a $286 billion highway bill,” he told reporters at a briefing following Bush’s meeting with his economic team.
Once again, the ‘soft bigotry of low expectations’ rules the day.
“Hey- it could have been a $400 billion bill, but we pared it down to below $300 billion.”
“Hey- we thought the deficit was going to be $450 billion, and it turnsout theeconomy is so good it is only $300 billion.”
This whole line of thought reminds me of an old Cheech and Chong routine:
“I used to smoke [rasp] 20 packs [rasp] of cigarettes [rasp] a day [rasp]. But now that I [rasp] lost a lung [rasp], I cut my smoking [rasp] in half.”
Just go read CAGW’s write-up before my head explodes.
norbizness
Not only that, but some homeless guy outside of the Washington Monument said that it would cost 120 quadrillion dollars and cause a rip in the space-time continuum. So thank God Bush held the line and only signed a bill that would build a $230 million bridge to connect a town of 8000 to a town of 50 (thanks, Alaska)! BTW, he promised to hold the line at $256 billion a year ago.
I liken the Administration to the scene in Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure where he nearly totals his bike, and then tells the gawking rabble “I meant to do that.”
Brian
Can’t fight this stuff, might as well join it. How can I get a few $100k from the gubmint? I’m thinking llama subsidies.
John S.
Pork Barrel Spending
It’s the new fiscal conservatism.
Yet another Jeff
I think excusing the signing of the bill by saying “well it could have been worse” is ridiculous, but don’t you think Bush deserves at least a little credit for pressuring congress to get the bill lower than they wanted? The House wanted $375 billion initially. The Senate $318 billion. The final version, after taking into account fudging of numbers, is $295 billion. Sure it sucks he compromised to get CAFTA votes, and I’m pissed he’s signing the bill, but I think it’s unfair to give him no credit for helping the bill get lower than it may have been
Kimmitt
Nope, he should have vetoed that piece of crap. If we’re talking about actually giving people credit. Also, speaking as a Federal Student loan recipient, I’m not thrilled about the budget being infinitesimally less insane on my back.
Yet another Jeff
Of course he should have vetoed it. But I’m not understanding why he should’t get any credit for both attempting and actually reducing the cost of the bill? Isn’t it possible to be simulatneously furious at him for signing the bill, yet also give him some praise for working to get the bill lower than it could have been?
Caroline
More bills from the “Borrow and waste” Republicans. So what else is new?
jg
Just remember where the $286 billion is coming from. The pockets of people who draw a salary and mostly those making less than $200000. Bush’s base of haves and have mores will pay very little of it.
Yet another Jeff
So why did the vast majority of Democrats vote for it?
Mr Furious
I think I recall Bush promising to veto any bill over $250 billion… So, no he gets no credit whatsoever. Let’s not forget this shit is all coming from his own party too, it’s not like he had to compromise with a Congress controlled by the opposition.
John S.
Because they are spineless dupes that are playing into the GOP strategy of “let’s all get along” faux-bipartisanship that they will use against the Democrats when the time comes.
Just remember that every Republican voted for this steaming pile of crap.
Yet another Jeff
Of course he has to compromise with Republicans in congress. Do you think the Republicans will just do whatever Bush wants, especially with an midterm election year coming up? Bush had to give a lot of giveaways, including the signing of the highway bill, just to get CAFTA passed because Republicans were bailing.
He’s an incredibly weak president politically. And weak presidents have to compromise, even with their own party members in congres
jg
Because they’re assholes too? Rich assholes for the most part. They also want their kids to inherit tax free. Its also not in the dems best interest to vote down a tax cut in most cases. Especially since most people don’t understand economics but really like it when Rush ells them tax cuts are good for people and stimulet the economy. I especially love the ‘I can spend my money better than the fed gov’t can’ argument. Would you give a company billions to research a way to stay in business after their product is gone? Shouldn’t they change or die on their own. Why do they get my money?
Yet another Jeff
Oh really?
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00220
Vote Counts: YEAs 91
NAYs 4
Not Voting 5
So who were the nays in Senate?
Cornyn (R-TX)
Gregg (R-NH)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
4 Republicans. Not one Democrat
Currently digging up house votes
Don Surber
Include me out on this one. I like the highways bill for more reasons than you can give against it
Kimmitt
The Dems who did vote for it did so because they hoped to get beta-male pickins for their own districts.
Mark-NC
The fun part for me is this:
In the next election, all Republicans will run as fiscal conservatives. The fact that they ran up massive pork-laden bills will be forgotten as they run around and claim that you can’t trust one of those tax & spend liberals with your money.
All Republicans will forget this bill & massive deficits and agree with the tax & spend liberal part – and vote straight Republican.
And Bush, who threatens vetoes but doesn’t have the balls or simply doesn’t give a damn (your choice), will be credited with his “leadership and fiscal constraint” without lifting a finger to do either!!