As I mentioned in the editorial I posted on Tuesday, President Bush recently vetoed a water projects bill passed overwhelmingly by Congress.  Here’s his reasoning:

<blockquote>In his veto message, Bush complained that Congress added about $8 billion in projects to the bill in conference committee after each house had passed its own version. </blockquote>

For those who don’t follow legislative politics, a conference committee is a group of Senators from each chamber (usually equal in number of members from each party) who work out differences in the bill, since a single version has to go to the President.  Now, while it may be true they could have added money to the bill, the fact is, the new version of the bill had to get passed again.

That’s right, it had to go back to each chamber and get passed again.  And it did, still with a massive veto-proof majority.  And the President still vetoed it.  He’s grasping at straws here, trying to look strong, while the veto of this bill only makes him look foolish.

You know, by the time I got done saying my editorial last Thursday, I was beginning to wonder if my description of Bush as the “playground bully” was too harsh of a description.  I thought then I should have made it less harsh, or have made my description of Congress as focusing on non-passable legislation as “only serving their electoral agenda” more harsh.  However, since the bill got vetoed, I’ve begun rethinking it, and now mostly stand by it.

Is he now really a lame duck?  You decide.