It’s a Friday afternoon, but I thought you might be interested in another veto statement from a few years back. The WRDA bill was called the Rivers and Harbors Act until the 1970s. I guess we’ve been here before. But it looks like there may be a different outcome. Truman, Carter, and Reagan all had their fights with Congress over the Corps of Engineers.

“I cannot overstate my opposition to this kind of waste of public funds,” with respect to projects that “have no economic justification.” – President Eisenhower vetoing 1958 Rivers and Harbors Act. The veto was sustained and Congress came back with a more responsible bill. It was one of two vetoes of Rivers and Harbors bills that he did before he finally signed the third.

“American taxpayers should not be asked to support a pork-barrel system of Federal authorization and funding where a project's merit is an afterthought.” President Bush vetoing 2007 Water Resources Development Act.
 

THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
(Columbia, South Carolina)

­For Immediate Release November 2, 2007

TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 1495, the “Water Resources Development Act of 2007.”

This bill lacks fiscal discipline. I fully support funding for water resources projects that will yield high economic and environmental returns to the Nation and each year my budget has proposed reasonable and responsible funding, including $4.9 billion for 2008, to support the Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) main missions. However, this authorization bill makes promises to local communities that the Congress does not have a track record of keeping. The House of Representatives took a $15 billion bill into negotiations with a $14 billion bill from the Senate and instead of splitting the difference, emerged with a Washington compromise that costs over $23 billion. This is not fiscally responsible, particularly when local communities have been waiting for funding for projects already in the pipeline. The bill's excessive authorization for over 900 projects and programs exacerbates the massive backlog of ongoing Corps construction projects, which will require an additional $38 billion in future appropriations to complete.

This bill does not set priorities. The authorization and funding of Federal water resources projects should be focused on those projects with the greatest merit that are also a Federal responsibility. My Administration has repeatedly urged the Congress to authorize only those projects and programs that provide a high return on investment and are within the three main missions of the Corps' civil works program: facilitating commercial navigation, reducing the risk of damage from floods and storms, and restoring aquatic ecosystems. This bill does not achieve that goal. This bill promises hundreds of earmarks and hinders the Corps' ability to fulfill the Nation's critical water resources needs — including hurricane protection for greater New Orleans, flood damage reduction for Sacramento, and restoration of the Everglades ‑‑ while diverting resources from the significant investments needed to maintain existing Federal water infrastructure. American taxpayers should not be asked to support a pork-barrel system of Federal authorization and funding where a project's merit is an afterthought.

I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities. Americans sent us to Washington to achieve results and be good stewards of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This bill violates that fundamental commitment. For the reasons outlined above, I must veto H.R. 1495.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

November 2, 2007.