And it's official, done under cover of darkness, behind closed doors.
Mr. Bush wielded his pen with no fanfare just before leaving for a visit to Lancaster, Pa. "He’s not going to change his mind," Dana Perino, the chief White House spokeswoman, said this morning just before the president cast only his fourth veto.
The issue is already showing up in campaign ads, like this one for Montana's Max Baucus:
This really will be the gift that keeps on giving all cycle, as Democrats gear up to make it a defining issue in 2008.
That party line, of course, is coming straight from the top, and many observers think it will come back to haunt the entire GOP a year from now. While the bill passed both chambers of Congress with relatively strong bi-partisan support, it failed to get enough votes in the House to override President Bush's veto, which he issued Wednesday morning. Bush insists the expanded program, by raising the income eligibility levels, would draw children away from private insurance plans and act as a first step toward socialized medicine. But Democrats know that ideological debates are no match for pictures of sick children, and they are already training their sights on eight vulnerable Republicans, including Kuhl, who voted against it. "It is a defining vote; it says a lot about people's values and priorities," said Representative Chris Van Hollen, a Maryland Democrat and head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
The Democrats' priorities in this instance are abundantly clear — they intend on making as much political hay of the children's health care veto as they can, whether or not they can eventually turn enough Republicans to override it. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has insisted he will continue to send the bill back to Bush's desk without modifying it for wavering Republicans, though House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has left the door open for changes. If the President vetoes the bill a hundred times between now and the 2008 elections the Democrats can portray the GOP as voting against sick poor kids. If the GOP caves, they can declare themselves the champions of children's healthcare and finally have a legislative accomplishment to boast about. Either way, they think they can't lose. "It's our hope that these members of Congress, when they hear from their constituents, that they'll choose children's health," Van Hollen said. "If not, voters will hold them accountable." [...]
Massa, a 48-year old retired naval officer who ran against Kuhl in 2004 on a platform largely about Iraq, said he is now making SCHIP his No. 1 priority. "It is rapidly overcoming Iraq and here's why: people have a hard time finding a solution on Iraq, they just can't. This has a solution — this bill makes sense, it is clear and evident."
Democrats plan on waiting a bit before shooting for the override, apparently into early November. Here is where things stand:
First of all, Democrats have the votes to override the veto in the Senate. So the focus is on the House, where we need 19 new votes to override.
Eight Democrats voted against this bill -- Castor, Kucinich, Etheridge, McIntyre, Boren, Hill, Marshall, Taylor, while Diane Watson voted "present". Watson and at least four of those Democrats are expected to change their votes to override (though we don't know which four). Kucinich needs to quit his "purity troll" crap and vote to override the veto.
And then it's off to the races as pressure is brought to bear on the remaining number of Republicans to flip their votes.
It's amazing that Republicans sought to politicize children's health care, but they chose this battle. Not us. And as they bray and whine about those mean Democrats scoring easy political points off this issue, it's important to note that had Republicans done the right thing from the start (and many did so, let's not forget), this wouldn't be anywhere near the political suicide it has become for the GOP.
Comments are closed on this story.