Today the president threatened to veto the $21 billion reauthorization of the Water Resources Development Act, which among other things would spend billions of dollars to improve hurricane protection along the Gulf Coast.

This provided an opportunity for semi-disgraced Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) to pop his head up to take a whack at the President Bush …

“I am stunned by the President’s WRDA veto threat. And I have one basic response – I will enthusiastically work to override his veto,” said Sen. David Vitter, R-La., in an unusually harsh rebuke to the leader of his own party. “Considering the well-publicized criticism of the way the administration handled this (Hurricane Katrina) disaster, I’m stunned. I’m afraid the promise the president made to the nation in Jackson Square comes across as hollow today.”

Not a happy development for Sen. Vitter (R-LA). According to DC’s WTOP, the escort whom DC Madame Deborah Palfrey calls “a favorite of Mr. Vitter’s” is scheduled to testify as a prosecution witness at Palfrey’s trial.

Just to make you feel better, the White House plan to ‘reform’ FISA takes the oversight for domestic surveillance away from the FISA court and gives it to the highly trustworthy Alberto Gonzales.

Here’s Sen. Leahy’s response …

Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy has been working closely with Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic House and Senate members to develop a responsible, targeted reform to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would address an immediate need with our nation’s foreign intelligence collection. Below is Chairman Leahy’s comment on the reform.

Comment of Senator Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,
Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee
On FISA Fix Proposal
August 1, 2007

“The Congress is willing and able to responsibly reform FISA when changes are needed, and now is such a time. In the last decade alone, Congress has amended FISA on many occasions, and I believe we should make this targeted and responsible fix now. The reform we have proposed to the Administration will improve the government’s ability to collect intelligence, while protecting the civil liberties of Americans by maintaining oversight of the FISA Court when calls to or from the United States are involved. The Administration, instead, would shift this oversight role and additional authority away from the expert FISA Court to the Attorney General. It is essential to preserve the crucial role of the FISA Court in protecting civil liberties of Americans while providing our intelligence agencies the flexibility they need. It is not wise to expand the authority of this Attorney General – or any Attorney General – in this regard. I urge the Administration to support this reasonable solution that ensures checks and balances while strengthening our national security.”

House progressives sink Jack Murtha’s plan for Iraq pullout because it lacks a “date certain” for completion of withdrawal. That and other political news of the day in today’s Election Central Happy Hour Roundup.

When you’ve got three members of your congressional delegation and they’re each in the middle of a major public corruption scandal, there’s just nothing else to call it but a mucktacular.

In today’s episode of TPMtv we bring you the latest on the scandals of Stevens, Young and Murkowski — special house raid and mink attack included! …

A new report details Rudy’s politically useful two-decade friendship with Fox News chief Roger Ailes. That and other political news of the day in today’s Election Central Morning Roundup.

Democrats and the administration go back and forth on how to provide oversight of surveillance of suspected terrorists.

From Roll Call …

Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) has used a Senate employee as his personal bookkeeper but does not appear to have paid her for those services out of his own funds, even as the aide collected more than a quarter-million dollars in federal pay, according to Senate records and the aide’s financial disclosure forms.

Barbara Flanders, who has worked for Stevens since at least 2004, has been paid as an employee of the Senate, first as a staff assistant on the Appropriations Committee and in Stevens’ personal office and, since October 2005, as a “financial clerk” on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

Would you like to get a daily briefing from TPM every morning, including links to our most popular stories, the latest polls, a list of the coming days political events and more? That’s what we send out to about 10,000 TPM Readers every weekday morning in our TPM Daily Digest.

It’s free. And we don’t sell, share, barter or do anything else with your email address other than send you our Daily Digest.

If you’re interested you sign up right here.

If you don’t sign up today, you can always sign up in the regular sign up form down below the news headline section on the right side of the site.

Yesterday we noted that a person identified as Sen. Stevens (R-AK) ‘bookkeeper’ had testified before a federal grand jury investigating Stevens. Later we learned that this ‘bookkeeper’ was also a senate staffer who was apparently managing Stevens’ personal finances.

Now, whenever we get into a situation like this it is always helpful to know not just what the rules are and what is (by whatever standard) appropriate, but also what the common practices are. In this case, I think it’s probably not that uncommon for certain congressional staffers to do the occasional task that is probably personal in nature. And I would not be at all surprised if some of the older and long-serving members of the House and Senate are still operating by ‘old school’ rules in which one or two staffers help the member out a lot with personal stuff. That’s not saying it’s okay. I think it’s just important context. I think if you look at some members that have been there since like the 60s or even 70s you’ll probably find some workplace norms that wouldn’t stand a lot of scrutiny today.

One other point is worth noting. There are some members who have a staffer who they also pay personally because some of their work bleeds into personal stuff.

So with all that context, let’s look at Sen. Stevens and staffer Barbara Flanders. Roll Call has a story on this in today’s paper. The reporter doesn’t say so explicitly. But the article suggests that not only does Flanders do Stevens’ bookkeeping but that she may also not have any actual senate duties. In addition, her job title at the Commerce Committee, ‘financial clerk’, doesn’t exist anywhere else in the senate.

And what else probably won’t surprise you, she makes a pretty decent salary — about a $150,000 per annum.

I don’t think it was terribly surprising to people on the hill that Stevens might have a staffer who helped him make sure his bills got paid on time and his check book stayed balanced. But if it’s true that Flanders actually had no senate duties, I think that’s going to be another real problem for Stevens.