From NBC's Mike Viqueira
The override debate will begin round about 12:00 pm noon ET today here in your U.S. House, with and hour of discussion planned. Then comes the vote, likely to begin around 1:15 pm. A 15-minute vote will ensue.

Two-thirds of House members present and voting would be required to override the veto. Currently your House consists of 433 members (two recently deceased), and if by some miracle all of them show up and vote, 289 "Yea" votes would be required to carry.

But whatever the case, they won't come close, seeing as how last week the measure passed by the barest of margins for success: 218 yeas. The only drama will be the possibility that somebody switches their vote based on the policy, as opposed to switching their vote due to some esoteric philosophy regarding override votes. You never know with some of these folks.

From Chuck Todd and Mark Murray
*** Supplemental Showdown, Round 2: For the last few weeks, it had been the same routine: Democrats worked on passing Iraq legislation with withdrawal dates, Bush staged events almost every day vowing to veto it, and Democratic leaders returned the fire. Now after Bush followed through with his promise yesterday and issued the second veto of his presidency, they can begin to work on some sort of compromise. Maybe. This afternoon, the president and congressional leaders meet at the White House to discuss the Iraq supplemental -- but not before the House tries to override Bush's veto (which won't succeed).

*** Can't We All Just Get Along? Sen. George Voinovich (R) talks compromise, but couldn't he have picked nicer imagery? Per the Washington Post, "'Some kind of compromise has to be worked out between the administration and the Democrats," said …Voinovich …, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. 'That's how it's done. Everybody holds their nose and maybe a couple of times vomits, but you get it done.'" Sen. Trent Lott adds, "'It's time to stop laying down these guidelines, saying, "It's got to be this, it's got to be that."'" The thing to watch: All of these congressional Republicans showing a willingness to compromise with the Democrats and rebuff the Bush Administration.

*** Up, Up and Away: In response to Bush's veto, Edwards goes up with his first TV ad. Although it will reportedly air only in the DC cable market, his campaign is calling it a "strong" buy, with the potential to become bigger. The ad's message: Send Bush another bill with the same withdrawal timelines. And another. And another, until he signs it.

*** A GOP in Trouble? We turn our attention today to the party's diversity -- or lack thereof. Almost a week after a female (Clinton), an African American (Obama), and a Latino (Richardson) participated in the Democratic presidential debate, ten white men will take the stage tomorrow in the GOP one. Bush and former RNC chair Ken Mehlman made minority outreach a key goal, and it paid off in 2004 (when Bush won about 40% of the Hispanic vote) and even last year (when the Republicans had three African-American nominees running in key races). But in those midterms, their share of the Hispanic vote dropped to 30%, and all three of those black nominees lost. Former Bush strategist Matthew Dowd once said that the GOP can't survive without getting more the Hispanic vote, but will it be able to do that after the Texan Bush leaves the White House?

*** California Dreamin': A day before the first GOP presidential debate in California -- which will air on MSNBC and is moderated by Chris Matthews in conjunction with the Politico.com -- nearly all of the Republican candidates are in California: McCain raises money in Beverly Hills, Huckabee fundraises in San Francisco, and Romney appears on the Tonight Show. On the Democratic side, Biden holds two town halls on Iraq in San Francisco. And Edwards, also on the West Coast, has his own town hall meeting in Portland.

*** And Don't Forget…: We've been loathe to over-promote ourselves, but figured today would be a good day to put in this plug: Be sure to check out First Read throughout the date for updates on the latest political news.

 

The Washington Post says Bush's veto yesterday escalated "the most serious confrontation between the White House and Congress over war policy in a generation… The clash harked back to the debates of the Vietnam War era, when lawmakers likewise tried to use the power of the purse to end an unpopular conflict."

The New York Times: "The next chapter begins Wednesday, when Congressional leaders are expected to meet Mr. Bush at the White House to open negotiations on a new bill. They are expected to look for ways to preserve the benchmarks for Iraqi progress that were included in the initial bill while eliminating the timetables for troop withdrawal that Mr. Bush has emphatically rejected. Several Republican leaders said Tuesday that they were likely to support such benchmarks, and White House aides said Tuesday that Mr. Bush, who has supported goals and benchmarks for the Iraqi government, might back such a measure — but only if the benchmarks are nonbinding."

But USA Today reports that there is no agreement in Congress on how to proceed. Rep. Jack Murtha "has proposed a bill that would provide funding for the wars for two months. Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, the Senate's top defense appropriator, called the idea 'not practical.' Murtha and Inouye are both combat veterans."

The Congressional Research Service said the Army can sustain its operations "through most of July" without new funding, while Bush Administration officials have said the military might be hampered by a funding crunch as early as May 15. Bush yesterday called the need for funding ``urgent.''

The Wall Street Journal: "President Bush can rely on strong Republican support in his veto of an Iraq-war funding bill, but the strain of the war risks creating splits in his party and producing major defections by this fall. Republican moderates, such as former Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner of Virginia, are already demanding a greater voice in the second round of talks on war funding. Rep. Ray LaHood (R., Ill.), who has been loyal to the president, said he and other Republican lawmakers will have to reassess their support if military commander Gen. David Petraeus and the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki don't show more progress by September."

In response to Bush's veto, Edwards is launching the first TV ad of his campaign, yet it appears only on DC cable. The Washington Post: "In the ad, nine people are featured protesting the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq and asking Congress to stand up to the commander in chief. 'President Bush isn't listening to us,' says one. Another advises: 'Don't back down to President Bush.' 'Send him the same bill again and again,' a third says. Edwards appears in the ad only at its conclusion to offer the required tagline: 'I'm John Edwards, and I approved this message.'"

Also responding to Bush's veto, the Democratic group Americans United began airing its own new TV ad (at about a $250,000 buy). "Four years later there's no end in sight. And George Bush still won't face reality," the announcer in the ad says. "Congress voted to start bringing our troops home. But the President vetoed the bill. He was wrong then. And he's wrong now. It's the will of one nation…versus the stubbornness of one man."

NBC's Mike Viqueira says the burning question yesterday was whether or not Democrats intentionally sent President Bush the Iraq supplemental on the 4th anniversary of "Mission Accomplished." The answer is no, according to Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi said that she was attending the funeral of Rep. Millender McDonald (D) in California, and that she therefore was unavailable to sign it until today.

The bill was done in the Senate by late lunchtime on Thursday. It is possible, Viq says, that she could have signed it then, or had it sent to California over the weekend (both the House and the Senate were out on Friday, natch). Similar things have been done in the past. But it's clear that they wanted to do this publicly -- whether it was the anniversary or not. Yesterday was the first day that it could be done.

Your First Read team has put together a list of Do's and Don'ts for the 10 Republican presidential candidates who will be participating in Thursday's debate that will air on MSNBC. Take a look.

Also, MSNBC.com's Curry notes that the debates give platforms to long-shot mavericks (as we saw last week with Mike Gravel), as well as provide fodder and talking points for the eventual opposition in the general election.

 

Despite trailing Giuliani in national surveys, McCain has the lead in the key nominating contests of Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, according to new American Research Group polls. In Iowa, McCain is at 26%, followed by Giuliani at 19%, Romney at 14%, and Fred Thompson at 13%. In New Hampshire, McCain is ahead with 29%, while Romney finishes second at 24%, and Giuliani comes in third at 17%. And in South Carolina, it's McCain at 36%, Giuliani at 23%, and Thompson at 10%.

The Los Angeles Times is the latest to write about how Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) is trying to influence the 2008 presidential race. "On Tuesday, [he] met privately with Republican candidate Mitt Romney in Sacramento. And Schwarzenegger will attend the GOP debate Thursday at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley as a guest of Nancy Reagan. He has already made joint appearances with Republican candidates John McCain and Rudolph W. Giuliani… Aides have said the governor may also deliver speeches in Iowa and New Hampshire, using the two crucial campaign battlegrounds to promote his ideas on such topics as curbing global warming and making healthcare coverage more accessible."

GIULIANI: The New York Times says that Giuliani's ties to a Texas law firm, Bracewell & Giuliani, has allowed him to raise plenty of money in that state. But it also poses risks for the former mayor. "The firm is perhaps the nation's most aggressive lobbyist for coal-fired power plants, heavy emitters of air pollutants and carbon dioxide, a gas associated with global warming… Most significantly, perhaps, the law firm is one of the higher-profile defenders of the oil, gas and energy industries, to which it provides legal help and extensive lobbying services in Washington."

We also wrote this yesterday, but Giuliani assailed Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez and called him a dangerous foe to the U.S. But the aforementioned Texas law firm -- with Giuliani's name on the shingle -- lobbies for the Chavez-controlled CITGO.

 

The American Research Group polls show Clinton leading in New Hampshire and South Carolina, but trailing Edwards in Iowa.

Both Clinton and Obama have now agreed "to participate in the June 3 Democratic debate sponsored by the New Hampshire Union Leader, WMUR and CNN," the Union Leader notes. "That event at Saint Anselm College will be followed two nights later by a GOP forum. Every major candidate will take part."

EDWARDS: The North Carolinian participated in an AFL-CIO town hall in Seattle yesterday. (Remember, the AFL-CIO is sponsoring individual town halls for all the Dem candidates). Before speaking on the issues labor cares about, Edwards was able to use the event to take a whack at Bush's veto of the Iraq supplemental, the Seattle Times says.

Per the Seattle P-I, Edwards spoke to about 800 union members and was only "flummoxed" once, "when a woman identifying herself as a bus driver bluntly asked: 'Are you willing, once you're elected, to repeal all right-to-work laws nationally?' The question, referring to laws in 22 states that prohibit closed union shops, drew cheers and whistles. 'That's a jump' from previous questions, Edwards replied, to laughter. But he found a tactful way to suggest that right-to-work laws are more a state, not federal, issue."

RICHARDSON: The New Mexico governor sought to put some distance between himself and Clinton and Obama on the issue of immigration. Richardson criticized the two for voting for the fence along the U.S.-Mexico border. Instead, "Richardson said he would double the number of border patrol agents and support improved security technology. He called for a crackdown on employers who hire illegal immigrants, increased legal immigration quotas and a process for legalization for immigrants already here."

The cloud hovering over Arizona Rep. Rick Renzi (R) is getting darker. Today, the Arizona Republic details a second controversy -- this one involving an FEC investigation. Of course, the FBI inquiry is much more serious. But this FEC news serves as "drip, drip."

"A federal appeals court in Washington ruled Tuesday that Representative Jim McDermott, Democrat of Washington, must pay damages to another congressman for giving reporters a tape of an illegally intercepted telephone call," the New York Times writes. "The case was brought by Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, now the House Republican leader. It arose from a conference call in 1996 in which Newt Gingrich, who was then speaker of the House, discussed how to deal with a finding against him by the House ethics committee. Mr. Boehner participated by cellphone."

By the way, Alberto Gonzales is still attorney general. Meanwhile, the congressional testimony by his deputy, Paul McNulty, was not helpful to Gonzales.

From NBC's Carrie Dann
In an address to the Latino Coalition in Washington, DC today, Giuliani focused on the hot-button issue most near and dear to his audience's heart: immigration. He outlined his stance (similar to the Bush administration's proposal of documentation, penalties, and then eventual paths to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the country), but he was careful to portray the immigration debate through the prism of national security -- his strongest issue by far. "If you have 12 million people ... that are here illegally, it is much easier for terrorists and drug dealers and criminals to hide." Registering undocumented immigrants, he proposed "get[s] that number down to a smaller group, so it's easier for me, if I'm the president ... to find the terrorists. Harder for the terrorists to hide."
 
Giuliani alluded again to the "white flag" comments that prompted a flurry of angry responses last week, when he implied that the election of a Democratic president in 2008 would increase the chances of another terrorist attack, but he softened a bit on the finger-pointing. "I understand why some people sometimes are in denial about this," he said today about potential terrorist threats. "Hard realities are hard to face."
 
Also of note: Giuliani wove harsh criticism of Hugo Chavez into his remarks on energy, bemoaning America's dependence on oil controlled by the Venezuelan dictator's regime. So keep your eyes peeled for a renewed effort by detractors to unearth business ties between Giuliani's law firm to Citgo Petroleum Corp, technically owned by the Chavez regime since its sale to Venezuela in 1990.

From NBC's Mark Murray
At their own signing ceremony of the Iraq supplemental, Democratic leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid urged President Bush not to veto the legislation -- even though he will. "A veto means denying our troops the resources and strategy they need," Reid said. "There is still time to listen to the American people ... and change course in Iraq."

From NBC's Mark Murray
The White House has just announced that it will be receiving the Iraq supplemental from Congress shortly. And when President Bush returns from Central Command later today, he'll veto the bill privately and will make a statement about it at 6:10 pm ET.

What's more, the White House is asking the TV networks and cable channels to carry Bush's statement live. In his remarks, according to the White House, Bush will outline the reasons for his veto, and make it clear he's willing to work with Congress -- beginning tomorrow -- to find a solution.

This will be just the second veto of Bush's presidency; his first struck down legislation expanding embryonic stem-cell research.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Not surprisingly, the Democratic presidential front-runners have all released statements this morning blasting the Bush Administration on this 4th anniversary of Bush's "Mission Accomplished" aircraft-carrier landing.

Said Clinton: "Never before in our history has a President said 'mission accomplished' when the mission had barely begun. Never before has a President landed on the deck of an aircraft carrier to proclaim the end of major combat operations to a war that rages on four years later... America is ready for a President who will respect our Armed Forces by properly planning for the missions we ask our troops to undertake. America is ready to end this war and when I am President, that's exactly what I'll do."

Edwards: "Now, the American people have given Congress a mission to end the war, but it hasn't been accomplished yet. President Bush has said he plans to veto the Iraq funding bill that Congress sent him. When the President vetoes the bill, it is George Bush who is not supporting our troops, and nobody else. Congress needs to stand firm and strong. When Bush vetoes the bill, Congress should send him another bill with a timetable for withdrawal and if he vetoes that one, Congress should send him another and another until we end this war and bring our troops home."

Obama: "Four years after President Bush landed on an aircraft carrier and declared 'Mission Accomplished,' we are still in a war where more than one hundred American service members have died in just the month of April... It is time to end this war so we can bring our troops home and redeploy our forces to help fight the broader struggle against terrorism and other threats of this new century."

From NBC's Mark Murray 
As we mentioned earlier today, Romney told FOX yesterday that L. Ron Hubbard's "Battlefield Earth" is his favorite novel. The Romney campaign replied to First Read that the governor "is an avid reader and has read many books." And, per his Facebook site, other books he likes include "Huckleberry Finn," Richard Ben Cramer's "What It Takes," Edmund Morris' "Theodore Rex," and Tom Friedman's "The World is Flat."

From Chuck Todd and Mark Murray
*** Tempting Fate: Outside the capture (and later execution) of Saddam Hussein, the smoother-than-expected elections, and now possibly the death of Abu Ayyub al-Masri, little has gone right in Iraq for the US since Bush made that famous Top Gun landing on the USS Abraham Lincoln exactly four years ago, with the "Mission Accomplished" banner in the background. And the American public has noticed. Per last week's NBC/Journal poll, majorities said that victory and even stability aren't possible in Iraq. On that day four years ago, did Bush break the rule that most superstitious people, especially sports enthusiasts, know by heart: Don't celebrate until you're sure it's over? By the way, it's May Day around the world. Look for the missile parade photo-ops.

*** Bench Press: It's also not a coincidence that Democrats decided this would be the day they'd send the Iraq emergency spending bill to Bush for his prompt veto, setting up the supplemental showdown between Congress and the White House. Yet the news today is that once the legislation is vetoed, congressional Republicans might be receptive to the idea of establishing benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet. When Boehner and Blunt start talking benchmarks (binding or not), then you know it must be getting a bit lonely at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave…

*** A GOP in Trouble? Yesterday, in advance of Thursday's Republican debate, we mulled over the GOP's identity crisis. Today, with Iraq in the news, we ask this question: How will Republican candidates win next year -- or even beyond -- by backing a war that's supported by just a third of the public? Bush and GOPers respond that they're doing it out of principle and because it's the right thing to do. But as Goldwater proved, you can't win national elections by principle alone.

*** Xenu and the Galactic Confederacy: Did anyone catch Romney say that Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard's "Battlefield Earth" is one of his favorite books? Maybe it's just us, but Marx's "Das Kapital" or Darwin's "Origins of Species" might have raised fewer eyebrows than Hubbard's book. Will the person who's already defending his faith -- Mormonism -- have to defend another one?

*** The E-Word: The slew of South Carolina endorsements Obama's camp received yesterday -- led by those from Dick Harpootlian and Inez Tenenbaum -- suggest that these folks believe Obama might be the most electable Democrat. Is that true? Out of Clinton, Edwards, and Obama, is Obama the face of the party that these SC Democrats believe will allow them to win statewide elections again?

*** On the Trail: Edwards participates in an AFL-CIO town hall forum in Seattle; Giuliani, in DC, keynotes the Latino Coalition's annual gathering of small business owners; McCain gives a foreign-policy speech at Stanford's Hoover Institution; and Romney is also in California for finance events.

Mirroring last week's NBC/WSJ poll, a new Gallup survey finds that 57% support a timetable for withdrawal, versus 39% who believe that US troops should stay in Iraq as long as necessary.

With the president's expected veto of the war-funding bill that sets timelines for troop withdrawal, NBC's Ken Strickland says that Senate action moves to closed-door strategy sessions and negotiations for a new bill. Those talks start Wednesday when Bush meets with congressional leaders at the White House. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Leader Mitch McConnell have already started talks on how to move forward and were scheduled to meet yesterday. 

Strick points out that the growing consensus building within the Senate leadership would be a new bill void of timeless and heavy on benchmarks for the Iraqi government. But the contention resurfaces as negotiators decided whether those benchmarks are binding with consequences or nonbinding. The Administration has suggested benchmarks that "tie the hands" of the military would also be subject to a veto.

The Washington Post: "Brushing aside White House opposition, Republican leaders in Congress said yesterday that negotiations on a second war spending bill should begin with benchmarks of success for the Iraqi government, and possible consequences if those benchmarks are not met… The administration dispatched Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Sunday to try to slam shut bipartisan talk of punishing the Iraqi government for not meeting benchmarks. Bush took the same uncompromising tone yesterday when he reiterated his veto promise."

Speaking of Rice and her effort to slow down any talk of benchmarks, the Democratic oppo-research blog Think Progress reminds us of her January 2007 testimony to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in which she said that the US will not "stay married" to its Baghdad security plan if the Iraqis don't live up to their own obligations.

RICE: [T]he most important thing that the Iraqi government has to do right now is to reestablish the confidence of its population that it's going to be even-handed in defending it. That's what we need to see over the next two or three months, and I think that over the next several months they're going to have to show that.
OBAMA: Or else what? Mr. Chairman –
RICE: Or this plan — or this plan is not — this plan is not going to work.

CLINTON: The AP looks at the gender issue through the prism of voting and notes, "Women sometimes set exceedingly high standards for female candidates." And that could hurt Clinton.

Meanwhile, the St. Pete Times writes that Clinton's speeches in the South last week "showed how she is trying to simultaneously inspire her supporters while softening her image with people who are less fond of her."

EDWARDS: The former North Carolina senator released a book yesterday advocating solutions to poverty.

Elizabeth Edwards was in New Hampshire yesterday arguing that her husband would be as good of an advocate for women as a female presidential candidate would be.

OBAMA: The campaign released a slew of new South Carolina endorsements -- including former party chair Dick Harpootlian and one-time Senate nominee Inez Tenenbaum. Both are significant due to the message they send. Harpootlian and Tenenbaum have been big advocates of electability, and Tenenbaum is eyeing the state's gubernatorial race in 2010. These endorsements suggest a subtle shot at both Edwards (somewhat surprising) and Clinton (not surprising if folks Google Harpootlian's past comments about the candidate).

RICHARDSON: While campaigning in Nevada, Richardson made a regional area type promise that could play well in the state: He said he'd have a Cabinet-level official solely dedicated to water issues, noting that the Department of the Interior doesn't provide enough leadership on the issue.

GINGRICH: Stumping in Oklahoma yesterday, Gingrich commented on George Tenet's book and stated if what Tenet said was true, then Tenet should have resigned.

GIULIANI: Somebody on the campaign's New Hampshire staff didn't do his homework. A list of state supporters that the campaign released actually included non-supporters. And those non-supporters are enjoying telling folks about it.

MCCAIN: The AP previews McCain's foreign policy speech at the Hoover Institution, in which he's expected to call for a "League of Democracies."  "McCain is careful to note that his proposed multinational organization would not be like Woodrow Wilson's failed 'League of Nations.' Rather, McCain says the organization would be far more similar to what Theodore Roosevelt favored -- a group of 'like-minded nations working together in the cause of peace.'"

Per advanced excerpts of his speech, McCain will say: "Like all other nations, we reserve the sovereign right to defend our vital national security when and how we deem necessary. But our great power does not mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume we have all the wisdom, knowledge and resources necessary to succeed. When we believe international action is necessary … we must work to persuade our democratic friends and allies that we are right. But in return, we must be willing to be persuaded by them. To be a good leader, America must be a good ally." More: "The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order of peace based on freedom.  It could act where the UN fails to act, to relieve human suffering in places like Darfur." 

ROMNEY: One of the best ways to reach the hearts and minds of key conservative groups is to denounce McCain-Feingold. And Romney, the AP writes, has been more aggressive than others in his criticism of McCain about the law.

Romney has been having a hard enough time dealing with his own religion on the campaign trail, and now he's opened up a Scientology can of worms by claiming that an L. Ron Hubbard book -- Battlefield Earth -- was one of his favorites, the New York Times' Caucus blog reports. "A spokesman said later it was one of Mr. Romney's favorite novels. 'I'm not in favor of his religion by any means,' Mr. Romney, a Mormon, said. 'But he wrote a book called "Battlefield Earth" that was a very fun science-fiction book.' Asked about his favorite book, Mr. Romney cited the Bible.

In addition, Romney's campaign is bragging about its online video traffic. From a release about MittTV: "Governor Mitt Romney announced today that his innovative Internet video channels have topped 1.5 million total viewings after just 15 weeks in operation and continue to break new ground by dynamically streaming his message of change in Washington to Americans across the country."

F. THOMPSON: The New York Times front-pages its Fred-Thompson-might-run story. "His supporters and others who have met with him are convinced that Mr. Thompson is nearing a decision and is likely to become a candidate in the weeks ahead, a probability they see reflected in the higher public profile he has adopted."

But check out the (potential) rival campaigns speaking on background. "A top aide for one contender said he thought Mr. Thompson would be stunned by the level of scrutiny he receive in a campaign not only from the news media, but also from the competition. He described Mr. Thompson as the potential Wesley Clark of the 2008 race: a popular figure whose political image and skills have not been tested."

The Politico writes that an announcement could come in June or July, and that Thompson's advisers are talking to potential campaign managers.

Three more Republican presidential candidates -- Romney, Huckabee, and Gilmore -- have paid their $25,000 filing fee to ensure their place in the second GOP presidential debate in two weeks. Filing and garnering 1% in the polls are the requirements for participation.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (?-CT) said if the two party nominees do not address "partisan polarization," a third-party candidacy could find traction, the AP writes.