In his latest television ad, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney boasts of vetoing budget bills that don't meet his standards. The commercial is meant to bolster the impression of Romney as a scrupulous steward of public dollars.

"I know how to veto," Romney says in the ad, which began broadcasting nationally last week. "I like vetoes. I've vetoed hundreds of spending appropriations as governor."

That's true. But what the ad doesn't say is how ineffective the vast majority of Romney's vetoes were.

For example, in his last year as Massachusetts governor, Romney vetoed nearly 250 items in the state budget. All of those vetoes were overturned by the legislature, effectively removing Romney from the final stage of the state's budget process.

That outcome is consistent with much of Romney's veto record. Nearly all of Romney's vetoes - of bills that dealt with access to birth control, increased funding for state zoos, and the creation of a Massachusetts Asian-American commission, among other issues - were reversed by the legislature, sometimes by unanimous votes.

"He likes vetoes, but most of his were inconsequential," said Jim Rappaport, a former chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Party and a frequent critic of Romney. "They were like writing in the sand: The waves came in and wiped them out."

Eric Fehrnstrom, a spokesman for Romney, said he was hamstrung in his veto efforts by the overwhelmingly Democratic makeup - nearly 90 percent - of the Massachusetts legislature.

"Effectively, the legislature always had the last word," Fehrnstrom wrote in an e-mail responding to questions about Romney's record as governor. "Washington will be different because there is more balance between the two political parties. Because there is not a lopsided Democratic majority in Congress, Mitt Romney is going to sustain a lot more of his vetoes."

Fehrnstrom pointed to a handful of Romney's vetoes that were upheld by the legislature, including his veto of a bill that would have let illegal aliens pay in-state tuition costs at state colleges. Fehrnstrom also noted that Romney successfully vetoed many budget items in 2003, his first year in office. That budget helped the state eliminate a $3 billion deficit without increasing personal income or sales taxes.

But by the end of his term, Romney's efforts to use his veto stamp to cut spending were rendered useless. In 2006, Romney's last year in office, the legislature overturned every single one of his vetoes.

Still, Romney's vetoes, even if ineffective, earned him the support of some taxpayer watchdogs. Barbara Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation, praised Romney's efforts in the face of a hostile legislature.

She said Romney's anti-tax stance was enough to keep lawmakers from proposing an increase to sales or income taxes.

"What else could he do?" Anderson said. "The legislature here is always happy to have a Republican governor they can blame. Once you give them money to spend, no one can stop them."

Jeffrey Berry, a political scientist at Tufts University in Medford, Mass., said Romney's veto record reflects his strained relationship with lawmakers. That tension grew worse over the course of Romney's administration, as it became apparent that he was looking beyond his time as governor, Berry said.

By the middle of Romney's term, "it was clear he was running for president, and he wanted to use the legislature as a whipping boy and use his vetoes as advertisements for a national audience," Berry said.

Single page