Clinton Takes Thin Slices of Pork From Spending Bill

President Clinton used his line-item veto Friday to kill eight congressionally mandated energy and water projects, hitting the home states of two GOP leaders but slicing a mere $19 million from a $21 billion appropriations bill.

Left on the cutting room floor at the White House are dredging projects in Mississippi and Alaska, home states of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, Republicans whose local projects have been spared in Clinton’s previous uses of the line-item veto.

Still, Clinton’s cancellation of only eight projects represents a very restrained use of the veto on a piece of legislation that is traditionally jam-packed with the kind of pork-barrel projects that the line-item veto was supposed to weed out.

“I tried to show deference to Congress’ role in the appropriations process,” Clinton said in a statement released while he traveled in South America. “Nevertheless, I feel strongly that my administration should look for opportunities to save taxpayer dollars by striking unwarranted provisions of bills that come before me.”

None of the eight vetoed projects is in California.

The action comes as two separate lawsuits have been filed challenging the constitutionality of the line-item veto, which lets the president veto specific items in appropriation and tax bills without killing the entire bill.

The National Treasury Employees Union filed suit Thursday after Clinton vetoed a provision that would have allowed many federal workers to switch retirement systems. New York officials have filed suit over Clinton’s August veto of a provision that would have affected the state’s Medicaid program.

Earlier this month, Clinton created an uproar on Capitol Hill by whacking 38 local projects from a military construction appropriation bill. Lawmakers from both parties squawked that the White House went too far. It was a politically risky use of Clinton’s new power, coming at a time when the White House was seeking lawmakers’ support for strengthening the president’s trade negotiating power. Ever since that furor, Clinton has been more sparing in his use of the veto, and congressional grumbling has diminished.

“There is receding concern as people have seen that we have been examining these projects carefully and the president has been acting judiciously,” said Franklin D. Raines, director of the Office of Management and Budget.

In reviewing the energy and water spending bill, the administration identified 423 projects, costing $817 million, as potential candidates for line-item vetoes because they had not been in the president’s budget. But most were spared because they were already in progress or were consistent with administration policies.

Raines said that the eight ill-fated projects were vetoed because they were new enterprises, had costs that exceeded their benefits, were for recreation serving few people or were considered “unwarranted corporate subsidies.”

Among the projects canceled were $3.5 million to dredge a lake in Indiana, $6 million to dredge a channel in Pennsylvania to provide access to a riverfront park and $1 million for a consortium of manufacturers to develop stronger supporting cables for high-voltage power lines.

Raines brushed off suggestions that political considerations were influencing Clinton’s veto decisions. Indeed, Clinton has vetoed many projects dear to powerful Democrats, while top GOP leaders like Lott and Stevens got off easy in earlier decisions. This latest round of vetoes shows Clinton for the first time willing to risk their wrath by hitting projects close to their hearts.

Stevens and other members of the Alaska delegation lashed out at Clinton for killing the $800,000 provided for dredging the Chena River in Fairbanks. The administration said that the project was objectionable because its aim was largely recreational, to create a channel for a single tour boat operator.

But Stevens argued that it was also needed for commercial and barge traffic on the river, which is particularly important in highway-poor Alaska.

The vetoed project in Mississippi would have provided $1.9 million to dredge Sardis Lake to “create a marina basin for leisure craft and recreational opportunities,” according to the administration’s analysis.

The project, which was not in either the House or Senate’s original version of the energy spending bill, was slipped in by a House-Senate conference committee at the urging of Lott and other Mississippi lawmakers.

“It is clear that the conferees chose to add a wholly new provision to this bill,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a critic of pork-barrel spending, said on the Senate floor. “And they did this behind closed doors, without the benefit of public or full congressional review.”

Lott’s spokeswoman had no comment.