Ignoring veto threat, Senate OK's $109b in spending

WASHINGTON -- The Senate passed a $109 billion war and hurricane-relief bill yesterday that is loaded with a raft of special-interest provisions for farmers, fishermen, and a major defense contractor among many others, setting up what could be President Bush's first veto.

The bill surpassed Bush's declared spending limit by approximately $15 billion, including various provisions, pet projects, and add-ons. Lawmakers, some of them self-described fiscal conservatives, apparently seized the opportunity to attach their own priorities to a bill sure to pass because it helps the troops in the field.

Ultimately, the bill designed to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus some post-Hurricane Katrina rebuilding in the Gulf Coast, was saddled with billions of dollars in extras, including $3.9 billion in farm aid, $1.1 billion to benefit the fishing industry, and $6 million for sugar interests in Hawaii.

The measure also includes $700 million to move a rebuilt Gulf Coast freight rail line that Katrina destroyed -- a project opponents have dubbed the ''railway to nowhere." But its backers were Mississippi's two powerful Republican senators: Thad Cochran, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, and Trent Lott, chairman of the Rules Committee and a former Senate majority leader.

In addition, lawmakers handed out $500 million to defense contractor Northrop Grumman, compensation for hurricane damage at a shipyard in Mississippi that Northrop's insurers have refused to cover. And New England senators added $20 million to help the region's fishing industry rebound from a red tide outbreak that dampened last year's shellfish harvest.

Bush has vowed to veto any spending bill that exceeds $94.5 billion. Government watchdog groups, meanwhile, said the spree demonstrates that, even as the budget deficit soars toward a record, lawmakers can't break their addiction to overspending.

''It's really mind-blowing," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan group that tracks government spending. ''They're the worst kind of addicts; they're recidivist junkies. They've shown time and again that not only are they not able to cut, but they can't stop adding."

The House-passed version of the bill, by contrast, contains little of the extra spending in the Senate version. The House's bill had a bottom line of $91.9 billion, and Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House majority leader, said the chamber would not agree to spend ''one dollar more" than the $94.5 billion ceiling the president has set.

That sets up contentious negotiations with the Senate, talks that will be shaped in part by whether lawmakers believe Bush -- who hasn't vetoed a bill during his five years in office -- would make good on his threat and reject a bill that ultimately would provide funding for the troops and other national priorities.

The Senate bill contains $65.7 billion for US military operations; $28.8 billion for Katrina rebuilding, levee repairs, and flood control; $2.3 billion to help prepare for a possible outbreak of avian flu; and $2.5 billion to improve border and port security.

The top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, practically dared Bush to veto the bill, saying that the Senate measure pays for a variety of pressing needs across the country.

''Have at it, Mr. President," Byrd said. ''It's a good bill. I'm proud to recommend it."

Cochran also strongly endorsed the final bill. He said the most contentious items had been challenged on the Senate floor and that a majority of senators voted to keep them in the bill.

''It reflects the judgment of the Senate, fairly debated and fully considered," Cochran said. ''The entire bill as a whole is important, and I'm proud to defend it."

Still, Cochran said he would keep an open mind in talks with the House about where to cut spending.

''Some people may pick out things that they might think are not needed or justified," he said. ''If we find provisions that shouldn't be in the bill, we'll try to take them out."

Two weeks of Senate debate on the bill demonstrated time and again how much lawmakers value local projects, particularly in an election year. Two fiscally conservative senators -- Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and John McCain of Arizona -- fought against a long list of special-interest provisions added to the bill.

They succeeded only once, persuading a majority of their colleagues to remove $15 million for a ''seafood promotion" strategy that would have been run by the National Marine Fisheries Service. The other provisions -- the aid to farmers and fishermen, the special construction projects, and a series of expensive new programs to provide the fishing industry in the Gulf Coast area with high-tech equipment -- survived.

Senator John E. Sununu, Republican of New Hampshire, said it was ''very disappointing" that his colleagues couldn't resist the urge to spend billions of dollars on items and projects that have nothing to do with national security or helping hurricane victims, as the bill intended.

''I'm disappointed in the outcome of a number of these votes," said Sununu, who voted against the bill. ''We have billions of dollars in completely unrelated spending."

When their projects were challenged, senators lined up to defend them. Cochran and Lott said moving the Gulf Coast rail line inland would speed up rebuilding and allow the construction of another road near the water that could be a crucial evacuation route during a future storm. The project survived by a single vote.

Senators representing states dependent on agriculture said high gas prices are particularly burdensome to farmers, since they raise the cost of cultivating crops and delivering them to markets. Farmers also face hardships from recent droughts and floods, they argued.

''We have sort of a unique situation in agriculture," said Senator Conrad R. Burns, a Montana Republican.

After the vote, New England senators -- including Democrats Edward M. Kennedy and John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, and Republicans Susan M. Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine -- took credit for the extra money to help the region's fishing industry.

''Last summer's red tide outbreak dealt a blow to our fishermen and the tourist industry in coastal New England," Kerry said in a statement. ''I'm grateful that the Appropriations Committee has included this funding to help our fishermen recover from these unexpected economic losses."

Among New England Republicans, Collins, Snowe, and Senator Lincoln D. Chafee of Rhode Island voted for the bill. Sununu and Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire voted no.