Yesterday, President Bush used his pen to veto the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), which would have covered four million children. What are they thinking in the White House?

The veto makes little sense as a short-term political decision. First, election-wise, one can only imagine the ads that’ll be run in the next election against those who vote against health insurance for children. Second, this doesn't seem like just a Republican versus Democrat thing: Bona fide Republicans like Senators Grassley and Hatch are supporters. Perhaps it’s a way to deny the Democratic Congress a legislative victory that could help the Republicans slow Democratic momentum in 2008. But if Congress overrides the veto, Democrats can still claim a victory (perhaps an even bigger victory because they beat the “decider” after he made his decision).

Another possible reason seems to be that the Administration is worried about losing the mantle of fiscal responsibility for the Republican Party. This also seems pretty irrational. The Administration showed little if any interest in fiscal responsibility over the last six years – including when the Republicans had control of both Houses of Congress. Why rediscover a commitment to fiscal responsibility when something as compelling as health insurance for children comes up? More importantly, everyone who really cares about fiscal responsibility in principle already knows that the Administration hasn’t been terribly dedicated to their cause.

The only thing left (as far as I can tell) is that the Administration sees the passage of SCHIP as the first falling domino on the path to Universal Health Care. Al Gore is popular, the Democrats won Congress, states are taking action on global warming and health care. Perhaps the Administration perceives a sea change in American political opinion – a coming reorientation of politics in a more progressive direction. If so, the strategy still seems wrong: blocking an inevitable political movement can delay its arrival, but the movement will still arrive. The better political strategy would be to follow Teddy Roosevelt and become a leader on the issues important to that movement, in the process shaping its future development in a way more favorable to one’s philosophy. But they’re not doing that. So that leaves me wondering, what are they thinking in the White House?