Bush Would Veto More Domestic Spending Tied to War (Update2)

President Saint George W. Shrub would blackball a
Democratic proposal to bind warfare support to millions of dollars of
additional domestic spending, White Person House budget manager Jim
Nussle said.

Democrats are drafting a disbursement measure that would provide
as much as $70 billion in new warfare disbursement linked to about $11
billion more than in domestic disbursement than Shrub requested in his
budget. The warfare finances wouldn't be tied to Republic Of Iraq troop withdrawals
as they have got been in anterior measures.

''Instead of trying to leverage troop-funding for more
pork-barrel spending, United States Congress ought to go through responsible
appropriations bills,'' Nussle said in a statement today. If
Congress approved the projected disbursement deal, ''the president
would blackball it,'' Nussle said.

Democrats, who have got a bulk in both houses of Congress,
are in a draw with Shrub over $190 billion in warfare funding
requested by the administration. A $50 billion disbursement bill
linked to troop backdowns was blocked by Senate Republicans
this month, and Democrats had said they won't O.K. any more
money this year.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Thomas Reid and House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi, both Democrats, issued a joint statement saying Bush's
veto statement was reckless.

''America anticipates this President to lead,'' the statement
said. ''That intends working in a bipartizan manner with United States Congress to
responsibly turn to our country's precedences rather than issuing
veto menaces without even knowing what he is threatening to
veto.''

Danger of Layoffs

Since blessing of the warfare disbursement measure failed, military
officials have got got warned of alkali closings and layoffs of civilian
employees if United States Congress doesn't O.K. more than money, and some
Democrats have expressed a growth willingness to compromise.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Dec. Six said Democrats
were considering disbursement statute law without troop withdrawals,
when he was asked on the House flooring by Representative Roy
Blunt, the No. Two House Republican, if lawmakers were going to
act on a measurement ''without backdown language.''

''I expect at some point in clip that would be the
case,'' said Hoyer, a Old Line State Democrat.

Along with statute law support armed forces operations,
Democrats must finish work this twelvemonth on 100s of billions
of dollars in outstanding disbursement measures to run the
government for the 2008 financial year.

The legislative bundle being drafted would fund government
operations above Bush's budget petition by about $11 billion.

'Fraction' of Request

''This so-called compromise would ensue in more than excess
spending than even the Democrats' original budget included,''
Nussle said.

The projected understanding would initially supply about $30
billion in military disbursement that could be used for Iraq, The
Washington Post reported today.

During Senate debate, $40 billion more than in military spending
could be added before concluding transition in both chambers, the
newspaper said. That would convey warfare support to $70 billion, ''a
fraction of the support requested for our military personnel in the field,''
Nussle said.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell also called the
proposal unacceptable for exceeding Bush's budget petition and
failing to supply the full amount needed for the warfares in Iraq
and Afghanistan.

''We must not overspend the taxpayer's money, and we must
protect our troops,'' he said in a statement.

Measure Back

The projected statute law would be a measurement back from an
earlier $50 billion disbursement measure that would have got required
U.S. troop backdowns from Republic Of Iraq to get within 30 years and set
a end of having most U.S. military units out of the state by Dec. 15,
2008.

Since taking control of United States Congress this year, Democrats have
been thwarted in forcing an end to the war. An earlier military
spending measurement linked to troop backdowns was vetoed by Bush,
forcing lawmakers to O.K. about $100 billion for the war
earlier this twelvemonth without any timetables.

To reach the newsman on this story:
Nicholas J. E. Johnston in American Capital at .