Washington ? For an unpopular guy on his way out of his office, President Bush still has some juice.

When Bush signed a law Thursday to broaden the government’s eavesdropping power, he served notice of how much sway he still holds on matters of national security. Yes, he is relevant in the twilight of his second term, even with anemic public approval ratings and much of the country tuning him out.

Bush got the anti-terrorism spying legislation largely on his terms. He also has won fight after fight to keep the Iraq war going without a timeline for withdrawal of U.S. troops. He vetoed a bill that would have banned waterboarding for terror suspects, then watched as Democrats failed to override him.

Contrast this to Bush’s domestic agenda, which is all but ignored by the Democratic-controlled Congress. He keeps pushing for items that seem to be going nowhere, from offshore drilling to tax cuts to a trade deal with Colombia. Lawmakers blew right by him in approving a massive farm bill.

Why the difference on security?

Because protecting the country is, in fact, a different matter. The president commands the military in a time of war. He leads a nation that was infamously attacked – and no one has forgotten 9/11.

So going against him can mean being labeled as soft on terrorism or unsupportive of the troops. In an election year, try going to the voters with that around your neck.

Sen. Barack Obama, the Democrats’ presidential contender, didn’t want to take that risk. He backed the eavesdropping bill on grounds that it was imperfect but better than losing a tool against terrorism.

The measure targets terrorists, though it has raised alarms about sweeping in innocent Americans. But opponents in Congress were hemmed in by time. Wiretapping orders approved last year would start expiring in August without congressional action.

Plus, there was Bush, offering a credible veto threat.

So Congress agreed on new surveillance rules. Including a provision Bush demanded: immunity for telecommunications companies that helped the U.S. spy on Americans.

“You’d have to say it’s a clear win for President Bush, but I don’t think it happened just because of President Bush,” said Norman Ornstein, a scholar on the presidency and Congress at the American Enterprise Institute. “An awful lot of Democrats just did not want this issue to drag into the summer and beyond with the possibility that something could happen out there, and this could have been put out there against them as a contributing factor.”