Hawai'i's legislative Democrats are meeting at the state Capitol to set the early stage for a political showdown with Republican Gov. Linda Lingle.

Lingle has vetoed a number of tax increase bills (already overridden by the Legislature) and says she intends to redline a bunch more of both tax and spending bills, largely — she says — out of an abundance of fiscal caution.

Our budget situation is surely high on the governor's mind as she reviews the 65 bills she may veto. But there is another side to the debate with the Legislature over what bills should become law this year: What we are seeing is a widening philosophical showdown between Republican Lingle and the Democrats which will likely affect next year's elections, from Congress to the Legislature.

Whether or not Lingle is successful in maintaining her vetoes, her stance on a wide list of bills is helping describe and identify what a "Hawai'i Republican" is. By the same token, the Democrats are shaping an identity for their party, which every candidate will have to deal with.

Prudent or profligate? Protector of business or guardian of the less advantaged? You have lots to choose from in this debate over specific legislation.

"While the Legislature has passed legislation that they believe is important and the public played a key role in the legislative process, it is my duty as governor to ensure the bills that become law are constitutional, fiscally responsible and in the state's and the public's long-term interest," Lingle said in announcing her potential vetoes.

That's more than reasonable. But let's look at the specifics:

First, Lingle vetoed four tax-increase bills that the Legislature found necessary to balance the budget. The governor had taken a strong no-new-taxes pledge so this made sense. The Legislature quickly acted to override, setting in motion a not-so-subtle class warfare dialogue.

It just so happens that several of the tax bills Lingle vetoed and the Democrats overrode took aim directly at the affluent in the form of higher marginal income tax rates or higher taxes on the sale of upscale homes.

The same kind of political subtext surrounds many of the other bills on Lingle's list. For instance, she says she may veto a so-called "barrel" tax on imported oil, which would go for a nickel a barrel to $1.05 a barrel. The extra money is supposed to support clean and alternative energy initiatives, an effort Lingle supports. But now, will Democrats be able to say she is actually anti-environment because she fought this popular idea?

Again, Lingle said she does not like the so-called "card check" law, which makes it easier for workers to organize unions. This is an issue where management and labor are on distinctly opposite sides of the issue and Lingle has made it clear where her sentiments lie.

On the social front, Lingle says she may veto a bill that reinstates Hawai'i's universal children's health care program. The governor cites cost concerns, since she fears some parents who are now paying for their own insurance will gravitate to the state's "free" program.

It's a logical concern, but it offers red meat to Democrats who might wish to say Republicans are unconcerned about the health of our Island keiki.

There are many more examples, of course. But the point is that while the battle of the vetoes may look like a fight over money and policy, it is also a battle to define the personality and soul of Hawai'i's two major political parties.