Trump Vetoes Unanimous Clean Water Project In Lauren Boebert's Who Voted To Release Epstein Files

US President Donald Trump vetoed the Finish the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act, a bipartisan infrastructure bill designed to deliver clean drinking water to underserved communities in southeastern Colorado, setting off immediate political backlash and accusations of retribution linked to a near-unanimous Congressional decision to release government files tied to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

The move marks the first veto of Trump's second presidential term. The Colorado water project had cleared both the US House of Representatives and the Senate by unanimous consent, a rare display of bipartisan support for a major infrastructure initiative intended to improve access to safe water for tens of thousands of residents.

Representative Lauren Boebert (R–CO), who sponsored the legislation, condemned the veto and suggested it was motivated by political reprisal for her support of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a law compelling the Justice Department to release millions of pages of investigative material.

Veto Halts Long-Awaited Water Infrastructure Project

Finish the Arkansas Valley Conduit Act aimed to complete construction of a project dating to the 1960s, designed to supply clean water to 39 Colorado communities where groundwater contamination with salt and naturally occurring radioactivity has long plagued households and farms.

The legislation sought to ease local financial burdens by lowering interest rates and extending repayment terms for participating communities, allowing the federal government to shoulder a greater share of the cost. It had been supported by Colorado's entire congressional delegation, including Democratic Senators Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, and Republican Reps. Boebert and Jeff Hurd.

In his veto letter, Trump argued the bill would shift too much financial responsibility to federal taxpayers and constitute an unwarranted 'handout' to local interests, a rationale consistent with his broader push against what he deems excessive federal spending.

Boebert rejected that framing. On social media and in official statements, she called the bill 'completely non-controversial' and hinted the veto was retaliation for her insistence on transparency in the Epstein file dispute.

Critics of the veto emphasised the bill's unanimous congressional approval, a rare outcome for major infrastructure legislation, noting its potential to rectify decades of unsafe water conditions.

Epstein Files Law and Partisan Friction

The Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 4405), which became Public Law No 119-38 on 19 November 2025, requires the Department of Justice to make publicly available all unclassified records in its possession relating to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein.

Introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D–CA), the bill was the product of a rare bipartisan coalition that successfully forced a floor vote under a discharge petition; it passed the House 427–1 and the Senate by unanimous consent.

Official roll call records confirm the overwhelming support in the House, with just one member, Republican Representative Clay Higgins of Louisiana, opposing the bill. Higgins said in a social media post that the measure risked exposing innocent people by releasing sensitive investigative records to the public.

A congressional clerk's office record shows Roll Call 289 on 18 November 2025 certified the 427–1 result, with five members not voting.

Trump initially opposed the legislation and pressured some Republican lawmakers to vote against it, though he later signalled he would sign the bill once it reached his desk.

Lauren Boebert was among the Republican signatories on the discharge petition that forced the House vote, defying White House efforts to stop it and aligning with several GOP colleagues who sought to compel full disclosure.

Political Repercussions and Allegations of Retaliation

The timing and context of Trump's veto have intensified partisan and intraparty tensions. Boebert's sponsorship of the water bill placed her at the centre of a broader narrative about political leverage in Washington.

Her public statements have characterised the veto as punitive, a claim that has resonated with some Republican critics of the president's handling of the Epstein files issue.

Democratic leaders quickly seized on the veto to criticise what they see as an attempt to undermine both infrastructure investment and bipartisan accountability efforts. They have highlighted the broader context of the Epstein Files Transparency Act and the administration's handling of the subsequent document releases.

The Department of Justice's ongoing review of the millions of pages of files and the slower-than-expected public disclosure process have been a source of frustration for lawmakers across the political spectrum.