News
Though the House easily passed a joint resolution Wednesday providing $463.5 billion in fiscal 2007 appropriations over some GOP objections, the path to clearing the measure won’t be as smooth in the Senate.
The measure (H J Res 20), which would fund the government through the end of the fiscal year, must be cleared by Feb. 15 to avert a government shutdown. That is the date when a stopgap spending law (PL 109-383) expires.
The continuing resolution (CR) passed easily, 286-140, with bipartisan support. Fifty-seven Republicans voted for it, though there was widespread grumbling among Republican lawmakers that the process did not allow for amendments.
The issue of amendments will be more complicated in the Senate. While that chamber is expected to clear the measure, individual lawmakers typically are afforded more opportunity to offer amendments than House members.
The Senate Democratic leadership could fill an “amendment tree” to essentially block consideration of Republican amendments, though Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has not yet said whether he will take that approach. The prospect has angered some Republicans.
“We can’t do much now, but there is going to be a significant price to pay if that’s how they are going to do it,” warned Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a fiscal conservative.
Senate Republicans will probably focus particular attention on boosting funding for base closures and realignment (BRAC). The measure provides $2.5 billion for base closures, several billion dollars less than President Bush’s request for fiscal 2007, but $1 billion more than in fiscal 2006.
Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, the ranking Republican on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said he wanted to add $3 billion for BRAC as emergency spending, without offsets. Stevens said he was confident he could get 51 votes to overcome a point of order if he could offer the amendment, but said the parliamentarian told him that he had no options if Democrats elected to use an amendment tree.
“I personally am offended that they are going to fill the tree on the CR,” he said.
Another Senate appropriator, Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, the ranking Republican on the Military Construction-VA Appropriations Subcommittee, said she was making it her singular focus to restore BRAC funding. Hutchison wants to offset the increase through a 1.2 percent across-the-board cut to domestic discretionary programs. “It’s essential that we not delay BRAC,” she said.
If the Senate were to amend the measure, that would either cause the CR to be sent back to the House to be cleared or require a House-Senate conference to settle differences between the versions.
Republican Reluctance
House Republicans did their share of complaining Wednesday about the substance of the bill, as well as the process used to draft it, though some in the end voted for passage. Voting against the spending measure could have put them in the potentially awkward situation politically of explaining why they voted to shut down the government.
They took a stand on an initial vote on the rule for the measure, which passed by just 225-191, mostly along party lines.
The GOP-led 109th Congress left nine of the 11 fiscal 2007 spending bills unfinished. To expedite enactment and clear the slate for the fiscal 2008 bills, the incoming Appropriations chairmen, Rep. David R. Obey, D-Wis., and Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., announced in December that they would wrap up the work by bundling the unfinished bills into a yearlong CR.
Unlike a standard CR, the 137-page fiscal 2007 bill would shift billions of dollars among programs. Although most would be funded at fiscal 2006 levels, the bill would provide added funding for Democratic priorities in such areas as health care.
Specifically, the measure provides $3.6 billion more for veterans’ health care than in fiscal 2006 and $1.2 billion more for defense health care. It would increase funding for Pell education grants by $615 million, allowing the maximum grant to be raised for the first time in four years. The National Institutes of Health would receive a $620 million increase, to $28.9 billion, while funding for global HIV/AIDS programs would receive a $1.3 billion boost to $4.5 billion.
The measure also would stop a congressional pay raise from taking effect. Last year, Republicans blocked Congress’ increase in the existing CR after Democrats made the pay raise a campaign issue.
The many anomalies to the fiscal 2006 baseline led Republicans to say that the product was not a standard CR, and therefore should be open to amendments.
”For all practical purposes it’s an omnibus bill,” said James T. Walsh of New York, the ranking Republican on the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Subcommittee. Still, he acknowledged that Obey and his staff had consulted him on his portion of the bill.
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, criticized Democrats for including “hundreds of millions of dollars worth of funding for earmarked pork projects.” Although Obey and Byrd did not include funding for new earmarks, the measure does not wipe out funding for projects approved in previous spending bills.
The ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, Jerry Lewis of California, said the “country would be better served by extending for a full year the clean continuing resolution the House and Senate passed in December.” That measure funded programs at the lowest of the House-passed, Senate-passed or fiscal 2006 spending level.
Obey responded indignantly to the Republican complaints. “You forfeited any right to squawk about how we cleaned up your mess,” he said to GOP lawmakers, noting that last year he had offered to make concessions on spending bills to allow them to be finished before adjournment.
Obey also said the earmarks that Republicans were criticizing were previously enacted, and that there was no requirement for the retroactive repeal of “silly things” approved by earlier Congresses.
“I do object to going back two years to clear up your mistakes, Jerry,” Obey said to Lewis.
Still, to register their dissatisfaction, Republicans forced a number of procedural votes that delayed final passage. That move drew criticism from Mike Simpson of Idaho, the lone Republican to vote in favor of the rule on the measure, who also voted with Democrats on the procedural votes.
“Doing this just to be obstructionist I don’t think is the right thing to do. I objected when the Democrats did it. How could I not object when Republicans do it?” he said. “And frankly the majority party . . . ultimately comes to the conclusion ‘the hell with them.’ This doesn’t lead to bipartisanship.”
The measure (H J Res 20), which would fund the government through the end of the fiscal year, must be cleared by Feb. 15 to avert a government shutdown. That is the date when a stopgap spending law (PL 109-383) expires.
The continuing resolution (CR) passed easily, 286-140, with bipartisan support. Fifty-seven Republicans voted for it, though there was widespread grumbling among Republican lawmakers that the process did not allow for amendments.
The issue of amendments will be more complicated in the Senate. While that chamber is expected to clear the measure, individual lawmakers typically are afforded more opportunity to offer amendments than House members.
The Senate Democratic leadership could fill an “amendment tree” to essentially block consideration of Republican amendments, though Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has not yet said whether he will take that approach. The prospect has angered some Republicans.
“We can’t do much now, but there is going to be a significant price to pay if that’s how they are going to do it,” warned Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a fiscal conservative.
Senate Republicans will probably focus particular attention on boosting funding for base closures and realignment (BRAC). The measure provides $2.5 billion for base closures, several billion dollars less than President Bush’s request for fiscal 2007, but $1 billion more than in fiscal 2006.
Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, the ranking Republican on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said he wanted to add $3 billion for BRAC as emergency spending, without offsets. Stevens said he was confident he could get 51 votes to overcome a point of order if he could offer the amendment, but said the parliamentarian told him that he had no options if Democrats elected to use an amendment tree.
“I personally am offended that they are going to fill the tree on the CR,” he said.
Another Senate appropriator, Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, the ranking Republican on the Military Construction-VA Appropriations Subcommittee, said she was making it her singular focus to restore BRAC funding. Hutchison wants to offset the increase through a 1.2 percent across-the-board cut to domestic discretionary programs. “It’s essential that we not delay BRAC,” she said.
If the Senate were to amend the measure, that would either cause the CR to be sent back to the House to be cleared or require a House-Senate conference to settle differences between the versions.
Republican Reluctance
House Republicans did their share of complaining Wednesday about the substance of the bill, as well as the process used to draft it, though some in the end voted for passage. Voting against the spending measure could have put them in the potentially awkward situation politically of explaining why they voted to shut down the government.
They took a stand on an initial vote on the rule for the measure, which passed by just 225-191, mostly along party lines.
The GOP-led 109th Congress left nine of the 11 fiscal 2007 spending bills unfinished. To expedite enactment and clear the slate for the fiscal 2008 bills, the incoming Appropriations chairmen, Rep. David R. Obey, D-Wis., and Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., announced in December that they would wrap up the work by bundling the unfinished bills into a yearlong CR.
Unlike a standard CR, the 137-page fiscal 2007 bill would shift billions of dollars among programs. Although most would be funded at fiscal 2006 levels, the bill would provide added funding for Democratic priorities in such areas as health care.
Specifically, the measure provides $3.6 billion more for veterans’ health care than in fiscal 2006 and $1.2 billion more for defense health care. It would increase funding for Pell education grants by $615 million, allowing the maximum grant to be raised for the first time in four years. The National Institutes of Health would receive a $620 million increase, to $28.9 billion, while funding for global HIV/AIDS programs would receive a $1.3 billion boost to $4.5 billion.
The measure also would stop a congressional pay raise from taking effect. Last year, Republicans blocked Congress’ increase in the existing CR after Democrats made the pay raise a campaign issue.
The many anomalies to the fiscal 2006 baseline led Republicans to say that the product was not a standard CR, and therefore should be open to amendments.
”For all practical purposes it’s an omnibus bill,” said James T. Walsh of New York, the ranking Republican on the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Subcommittee. Still, he acknowledged that Obey and his staff had consulted him on his portion of the bill.
House Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, criticized Democrats for including “hundreds of millions of dollars worth of funding for earmarked pork projects.” Although Obey and Byrd did not include funding for new earmarks, the measure does not wipe out funding for projects approved in previous spending bills.
The ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, Jerry Lewis of California, said the “country would be better served by extending for a full year the clean continuing resolution the House and Senate passed in December.” That measure funded programs at the lowest of the House-passed, Senate-passed or fiscal 2006 spending level.
Obey responded indignantly to the Republican complaints. “You forfeited any right to squawk about how we cleaned up your mess,” he said to GOP lawmakers, noting that last year he had offered to make concessions on spending bills to allow them to be finished before adjournment.
Obey also said the earmarks that Republicans were criticizing were previously enacted, and that there was no requirement for the retroactive repeal of “silly things” approved by earlier Congresses.
“I do object to going back two years to clear up your mistakes, Jerry,” Obey said to Lewis.
Still, to register their dissatisfaction, Republicans forced a number of procedural votes that delayed final passage. That move drew criticism from Mike Simpson of Idaho, the lone Republican to vote in favor of the rule on the measure, who also voted with Democrats on the procedural votes.
“Doing this just to be obstructionist I don’t think is the right thing to do. I objected when the Democrats did it. How could I not object when Republicans do it?” he said. “And frankly the majority party . . . ultimately comes to the conclusion ‘the hell with them.’ This doesn’t lead to bipartisanship.”
