How can Congress accomplish anything when Bush vetoes everything?

Question

Well, asking this simple, little question set off a firestorm, didn't it? It certainly made a point to me!
And that point is: Don't assume!!
Don't assume...
...that you don't have to spell out e very little thing
...don't assume that Y!A answerers can read between the lines
....don't assume that being a Top Contributer leads people to understand that you know a thing or two about politics...
....don't assume that people realize I have a brain and at age 60 have had more then a few "civics courses"
ETC.

Of course, I know that vetoes can be over-ridden! I was referring to ALL of the obstructionist tactics used by the current administration.

My bad, for "assuming" a level of comprehension nonexistant here!

Answer 1

I think that's the point. As long as he vetoes everything, Congress can't accomplish anything... and he'll always have congress to blame for 'not accomplishing anything'.

Answer 2

There really isnt anything they can do to get things past him.

Pork is not the issue-that is clear by the fact that Bush only started vetoing for pork when they started putting up things he didnt agree with--no issue was made when it was his people doing it on his bills.

I agree with CVG though--the best course of action is to introduce as many highly popular bills as possible right now that Bush will disagree with. He will either be forced to stop vetoing, or admit that he disagrees with a majority of the country.

Unfortuantely they wont do that. Bush may be breaking the cooperation rules that the parties live by to keep themselves in power, but he's not doing that much to hurt that system overall. It is in the best interest of both parties to let things continue until the next election, then the Reps can split from Bush or not as they see fit afterward.

Answer 3

I am no great fan of GWB, however several vetoes get bad press that he doesn't deserve. The Kyoto veto was because the largest polluters in the world were exempted - China & India. Any person that wouldn't veto this (or not sign it) is irresponsible. Second veto - government funded stem cell research. If a scientist or MD working under public funding encouraged a woman to have an abortion to harvest stem cells, I would find it just as offensive of some religious wacko getting my money to influence a choice that the majority of us feel belongs to a woman and those SHE chooses to involve.

Answer 4

Funny thing is, the Liberal congress knew all of this going in, yet boasted so much, while producing so little. Maybe if the LIberal congress actually wrote a bill that meant anything, it would not get shot down so easily. Last novenmer, all we heard was libs screeching about the democratic sweep, NOW, all we hear is how it's still all Bush's fault.

Answer 5

Simple: override the veto.

If Bush really /were/ vetoe-happy, even his own party would get behind an override, just to get something done. The something would have to actually be useful, though, not just another political stunt...

Even simpler, use the 'power of the purse' - don't pass any further spending, /particularly/ Iraq-War funding, until the President plays ball.

Congress has a tremendous amount of power. The problem is that when you use power, you take on some responsibility, and the Dems leading Congress would rather cede Bush all the power, so he takes all the Blame...

Answer 6

They could if they wanted to but they do not want to pull out of Iraq.
You on the left are being used. they could have cut the funding but they know that if they did than the next time we are hit which will happen than they own defeat. And they will be done as a party. The dirty little secret is you on the left are to blind to see and you do not hold them accountable like we do on the right.
We showed our voice on the amnesty bill and will be heard on others. We let you win in 06 but not again.
Love those first 100 days don't you.
not one thing done.
Veto all the lefts bill GWB and will not let you give away America the one nation under God.

Answer 7

the best way is to over ride his vetoe with a two thirds majority( Although much easier said than done) I think that they should just get off their duffs and start working towards impeaching this baffoon and enemy to American Freedom

Answer 8

They could start by approaching their jobs in a spirit of cooperation as they promised before the midterm election, rather than trying to ram legislation through which they know will not pass in order to attempt to make the Republicans look bad. People voted for the Democrats because they promised a new spirit and change. To date what we have received is more business as usual in Washington.

Answer 9

They can't without enough votes to override the veto. In order to do that, they would need help from Republicans. I could care less at this point. Either the war ends or it continues and Republicans lose all power, in which case it ends regardless.

Answer 10

Actually, if congress wanted to end the war, instead of sending a bill to Bush which he would veto, simply don't approve any spending for the war. The won't do this, as the Republicans would twist it to make it seem as if the Democrats weren't supporting the troops or were being defeatist.