Trillion Spending Bill Emerges

As was expected after the Paul Ryan/Patty Murray budget agreement was passed through Congress and signed into law by President Obama, a new spending bill is emerging in the House of Representatives. It is being written in a secretive process on the sub-committee level, for the time being. As outlined in the Ryan-Murray budget agreement, it is based on a $1.012 trillion spending cap.

As also should be expected, it is opposed by many of the same Republicans who opposed the Ryan-Murray agreement because it raises the spending cap above the levels set by the sequestration legislation. There are more than a few of those Republicans who want to be able to offer floor amendments to the spending bill that is being written. Some of those Republicans have said they could support the spending bill, were it to contain certain policy riders. It remains to be seen if that will happen.

Government Spending BillThe Hill – Republican Study Committee Chairman Steve Scalise (R-La.), one of the no votes, told The Hill this week that he could be open to voting for the omnibus if some key policy provisions are included, such as limits on ObamaCare’s implementation.

But he acknowledged that his impression from appropriators is they will not risk a new showdown over ObamaCare, which triggered a 16-day government shutdown in October.

To get his vote, Scalise argued that at the very least, Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) must score wins on energy, defense and homeland security spending provisions.

The House approved Energy and Water, Defense and Homeland Security appropriations bills this summer with numerous amendments, while the full Senate did not vote on companion bills.

“We passed a few appropriations bills and we put some policy riders that reflect conservative principles,” Scalise said.

He said a final bill at a minimum should reflect GOP policy riders that scale back funding for wasteful green energy programs favored by the Obama administration. Examples of floor amendments include ending funding for green energy advertising and limiting federal agency procurement of alternative fuels.

Energy riders could have a good shot given Rogers’ keen interest in helping the coal industry.

Scalise said conservatives will push leaders to allow floor amendments on the omnibus, something that could make completing the bill in just over a week problematic.

Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), who has made fiscal matters his signature issue, said he expected conservatives to offer an amendment to bring the top-line number down to $967 billion.

Another amendment, he said, would trim spending by 1 percent across the board. He said he would push for a House rule that would cover votes on those issues.

Mulvaney was less optimistic about getting policy riders on the omnibus.

He said GOP leaders appear ready to rely on Democrats to pass the omnibus, and as a result won’t feel the need to push policy riders.

“We were told in no uncertain terms that they would not be coming to us for votes,” he said. “Part of the deal with Democrats also included their support on appropriations.”

He said that “personally it would be difficult to support” any omnibus at a spending level higher than $967 billion, regardless of policy riders.

Pay close attention to the portion I have emphasized. If that statement is true, and I have no reason to believe it is not, conservatives have every reason to be concerned about the leadership of the Republican Party in Congress. Speaker John Boehner seems to have little care for the concerns voiced by the conservative members of his caucus. He and his leadership team were determined to force the Ryan-Murray agreement down our throats and they are proceeding with full steam towards implementing as much of the government spending as they possibly can.

If this proceeds as I think it will, the spending bill will be rammed through both houses of Congress and under the President’s pen in post haste fashion. Conservatives will then know for sure (if they don’t already) where they stand with the leadership of their party.

About LD Jackson

LD Jackson has written 2038 posts in this blog.

Founder and author of the political and news commentary blog Political Realities. I have always loved to write, but never have I felt my writing was more important than in this present day. If I have changed one mind or impressed one American about the direction our country is headed, then I will consider my endeavors a success. I take the tag line on this blog very seriously. Above all else, in search of the truth.

6 comments to Trillion Spending Bill Emerges

  • This actually doesn’t surprise me at all. For a long time now the Republican leadership has essentially been acting as tools of the Democrats. That they are now blatantly working with them and telling conservatives their votes are irrelevant is infuriating. When will people wake up and stop sending these Democrats in Republican clothing back to Congress? Until that happens absolutely nothing is going to change.

    • I think that’s the biggest reason why the Republican establishment is fighting so hard to retain their control. They gave the more conservative members of their caucus a strong voice after 2010 and they didn’t particularly like the results. They are now doing whatever they can to whip those conservative members back into line with the thinking of the leadership. That serves to tell me the leadership needs to go. Whether that can be done remains to be seen, but any possibility of accomplishing that has to start by refusing to send these Democrats in disguise back to Congress.

  • The progressives control both parties unfortunately.

  • The Republican leadership has thrown in the towel. They do not want to confront the Democrats on any tough issue because it is an election year and they do not want to be seen as the party of no. It is sickening!

    • There are times when I wonder why they even bother showing up. If they refuse to fight for the conservative policies we believe in, they may as well just go home. I, for one, am sick to death of hearing the Republicans called the party of no. There is much more to the positions we hold on the issues than that.


  • Trackbacks: