Mixup throws House veto override in doubt

[deminks]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The House overwhelmingly rejected President Bush's veto of a roughly $290 billion farm bill but what should have been a stinging defeat for Bush became an embarrassing episode for Democrats.

Only hours before the House's 316-108 vote, Bush had vetoed the five-year measure, saying it was too expensive and gave too much money to wealthy farmers when farm incomes are high. Only hours later, the House voted 316 to 108 to override the veto, and the Senate had been expected to quickly follow suit.

But action stalled after it was discovered that Congress had omitted a 34-page section of the massive bill when it sent the measure to the White House. That means Bush vetoed a different bill than Congress approved, leaving leaders scrambling to figure out whether it could become law.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_go_co/bush_farm_bill_12

---

The bill may have a lot of pork, but I think this is more of a chimpface-saving act than anything to do with anything in the bill. Kind of a "thou shalt not override the chimperor" kind of thing. Or, he is using this for something else. This article says 2/3 of the bill is for food stamps and other programs for the poor and for school children. We know what the chimperor does for the poor and school children.

[SpiralHawk]

1. "Smirk." - Commander AWOL & McSame

[Aragorn]

2. sums it up pretty well

Bush shafting the poor, congress can't get anything right.

"Representative" democracy?

[pimpbot]

3. Actually its congress that cant get anything right

Someone should be fired for this. How can you send the wrong package to the White House? Was it sabotage by the republicans?

[Aragorn]

4. yeah

that's what I wrote.. Seems it would quick and easy to re-vote with the 34 page problem corrected, don't you think?

[bjobotts]

5. Rep Young from Alaska says it still counts, just change it.

[ohio2007]

8. fingers can and will be pointed at the govt printing office

but I still wish a line item veto power could be given to the executive branch and have those items sent back for a legislative review
jmo

[happyslug]

10. I agreed with Senator Byrd on the line item Veto...

If LBJ(Lyndon Baines Johnson) had the line item veto the US would have had a dictatorship. A line item veto permits a President to defeat any congressional compromise, all he has to do is veto out the compromise. Since Compromises rarely have more then enough support to pass, they would NOT be enough votes to override. Thus the compromise would be killed. This would end legislative compromise, for why compromise, the President will take out what he don't want anyway.
Maybe it is my background, in 1912 the State of Pennsylvania voted to merge the City of Pittsburgh with the County of Allegheny (The County the City is in) as part of an overall reform of the City of Pittsburgh Government. The Governor at that time item vetoed that merger, but left the rest of the Act become law, so the City of Pittsburgh was left with a Government designed for the COUNTY as a whole, even through only 1/3 of the area of Allegheny County. By the 1960s more people lived in the Suburbs OUTSIDE the City but Inside the County then in the city proper. The City still does NOT have a metropolitan Government, 1912 was the last real chance for it. Most observers at the time said the Act would NEVER have passed except for the merger of the City and County, but the Governor's item veto took that out of the picture. Since most Representatives lived outside Allegheny County, there were NOT enough votes to overrule the Governor's Veto.

Line Item vetoes have the potential to do more harm then good. Bush would have line item veto almost all domestic spending if he had a line item veto, His Signing statement would have been line item vetoes of the provisions of law he opposed. The Opposition (and that was the Democratic Party till 2006) position would be weaker then ever. If the minority party agreed with anything the majority party was divided on, that Compromise could be vetoed out of the law by the President. Thus I rather have excessive spending do to earmarks and other congressional "abuses" then to strengthened the President into a Dictator by giving him a line item veto.

[Roy]

6. didn't they pull this crap with the Clinton's?

With billing records coming up missing, and then re-appearing right in plain sight.

Sounds like the section was slipped out, only to be miraculously discovered just in time to embarrassed the Dems.
Dirty tricks are all the repubs have so they will use it.
Not like they can win anything based on policies that benefit average Americans.
These despots will do anything no matter how sleazy.

[ohio2007]

7. 34-page section 'omitted' ? Wonder if they will release those pages

Congress had omitted a 34-page section


34-page section of baby back and St.Louis cuts I'll bet.....and if the bill passed, would the 34 pages be sliped back into the bill,nobody the wiser?

but the spin to these 34 pages could be used in FUTURE ad campaigns;

....That means Bush vetoed a different bill than Congress approved, leaving leaders scrambling to figure out whether it could become law.


I still wonder if they will release what was on those 34 pages soon or wait until it coud be used for political gain against either party .

[Earth Bound Misfit]

9. “likely” solution to the parliamentary snafu...

Source: Yahoo! News

...After consulting with parliamentarians, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said that the House had properly overridden Bush on those portions on the parchment — but that left Title III, which covers trade and important international nutrition programs, out in the cold.

To remedy the situation, the Maryland Democrat said Wednesday night that the “likely” solution to the parliamentary snafu will be for the Congress to send Bush a newly numbered bill with the full text of the one voted upon last week.

“We can pass a full bill again. I think that’s likely, or we can just do Title III,” Hoyer said. He had not yet consulted with Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) but signaled that passing the bill again was the cleanest route and one he hoped could be done quickly.

--snip--

The day had begun with more confidence. Stepping out of character, the Senate’s mild-mannered Finance Committee chairman, Sen. Max Baucus, had even taunted Bush for having brought “a knife to a gunfight” in the Farm Bill veto battle, which the Montana Democrat dismissed as “a speed bump on the road” toward enacting the legislation.

The macho talk reflected growing disagreements between Congress and the White House five months before the November elections. The Democrats’ proposed budget resolution would add $21 billion to White House appropriations requests for the coming year. And education is a signature issue for the party, from public school reading programs to GI benefits.

"the Senate’s mild-mannered Finance Committee chairman, Sen. Max Baucus, had even taunted Bush"

OUCH!

Full Article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080522/pl_politico/10548;_ylt=AjnHh7Quj54v2kmDSvOMIgSMwfIE

[underpants]

11. They are going to try to hide behind THIS to push the farm bill back?

First of all the Dems have been dead WRONG on the lack of public discussion allowed on this

but if the Republicans (and yes I do smell a rat here) think they can hide behind this bit of parliamentary nonsense they really are loonier than anyone thought.

[Eugene]

12. Reuters: To fix error, House to vote again on farm bill

Source: Reuters

To fix error, House to vote again on farm bill
Thu May 22, 2008 9:28am EDT

By Charles Abbott

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives will
vote again on sending the $289 billion U.S. farm bill to the
White House to clear up an embarrassing clerical error
discovered after the bill was vetoed, Democratic leaders
said on Thursday.

They said the House would vote under rules that prevent any
amendments and limit debate but require a two-thirds vote for
passage.

The House also was scheduled to vote on a stopgap bill to
keep Agriculture Department programs running until June 6.
It would be the seventh short-term extension while Congress
works on the farm bill, nearly eight months overdue. The
current extension expires on Friday.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSWBT00902120080522

[baldguy]

13. If Congress passes a bill & the President *doesn't* veto it doesn't it become a law automatically?

Sounds like a lack of due diligence on the chimp's part