Bush's rejection of emergency spending seen as souring Hill relations

President Bush's decision this week not to release some $5.1 billion in emergency spending in the recent fiscal 2002 supplemental because it would have funded congressional projects he did not approve was the opening salvo in what promises to be a stormy appropriations season this fall.

Bush's allies say the move helps solidify a GOP election-year message that Democrats are squandering taxpayers' money, but his critics note that the move only worsens relations between appropriators and the White House when they are supposed to work together to get appropriations bills done.

"It's as much a slap at [Senate Appropriations ranking member] Ted Stevens, [R-Alaska], as it is at [Appropriations Chairman] Bobby Byrd,[D-W.Va.]," said one House Democratic source.

Stevens, for instance, had endorsed writing the bill so that the president had to accept all the programs in the entire package or reject all of them outright-language the administration strenuously opposed-and Republican appropriators had supported the spending as much as Democrats. The rejection of that fund, then, means appropriators of both parties may retaliate this fall.

"This is going to be the ugliest appropriations season in a long, long time," said Stanley Collender, national director of public affairs for Fleishman-Hillard Inc.

Collender said the infighting between appropriators and Office of Managment and Budget means fewer appropriations bills will get completed before Congress is forced to accept a continuing resolution and that the goal of adjourning in early October simply "isn't happening."

But Bush conversely may be seen as reasserting himself on fiscal matters as voters, worried about the economy, head to the polls in November. "The administration had to draw a line in the sand and send a message," said a House GOP leadership source. "Our base has to see that we're fighting."

Republicans are wary of repeating the mistakes of 1998, when Republicans suffered major losses after their base, deflated from a congressional spending spree, failed to show up at the polls.

Lee Culpepper, head of the Fiscal Responsibility Coalition, a group of 270 business groups looking to rally behind the White House's position on spending matters, said Bush was "building momentum" for the fall, when Republicans aim to label Democrats as big spenders.

"The president and the House want to control spending. The Senate wants to spend more," said Culpepper, who also heads the National Restaurant Association.

Still, while rejecting emergency spending in August may not carry much political risk, vetoing other spending bills in September and October could be trickier for the president. Republicans, eager to take credit for securing home projects just before the elections, might start pressuring Bush to back off, especially if Democrats are successful in accusing them of wanting to cut popular programs.

"Democrats are going to have to put something in the bills that, in case he does veto them, it's perceived as doing more damage to Republicans," said a House Democratic aide. "The only question is, can that be done?"