« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Stop Harry Reid’s Egregious Budget Power Grab

Don't let the fox guard the hen house

Senate Democrats (and all other Democrats, for that matter) have not passed a budget for over 900 days, yet they are planning to come late to the game and commandeer the appropriations process.  After delaying the process for over two years, Harry Reid, with the help of some Senate Republicans, is planning to expedite appropriations bills in a way that disavows standard procedures of transparency.  House Republicans must rebuff this insidious plan.

When Republicans assumed control of the House earlier this year, they completed the job that Democrats refused to do regarding the FY 2011 budget.  Additionally, they passed a concurrent budget resolution for FY 2012, and proceeded to complete half of the 12 annual appropriations bills.  When it became clear that Senate Democrats were dithering with roll call votes and speeches, and had no intention of even passing a budget resolution, Republicans held back the remaining approps bills, in an effort to wait for the Senate to get its act together.

Now, instead of coming to the table and passing the 12 individual appropriations bills along with a budget resolution, Harry Reid is seeking to circumvent the process by using “Minibus” bills.  He rightfully perceives that a 12-bill omnibus package would be politically unpopular, so he is planning to bundle the 12 appropriations bill into four minibus bills, containing three spending bills apiece.

Why does Reid want to use this awkward and obscure process for appropriations bills?

If Reid were to send over individual bills to the House, Republicans would be able to alter the bills that were not already passed by the House through the regular amendment process.  Instead, he plans to use the Agriculture appropriations bill –a bill that has already passed the House – as a vehicle to carry his first minibus bill, containing the Commerce-Justice-Science and Transportation-HUD bills as well.  This will allow Senate Democrats to control the content of extraneous unrelated bills and force the House to vote on them without amendments.  They will be deemed as conference reports (because the Ag part was already passed by the House), precluding Republicans from stripping out pernicious spending and policy initiatives, even on separate spending spheres that the House has not considered yet.

Here is how it is explained by CQ:

The decision by Senate leaders to move fiscal 2012 appropriations through a series of “«minibus»” packages rather than an omnibus promises to expedite the process while also strengthening the chamber’s hand in negotiations with the House.

Although House Appropriations staff members are looking at how compromise versions of the Senate spending packages could be quickly assembled, some conservative House Republicans are already balking at the idea of clearing final spending bills as conference reports not subject to amendments on the floor. [...]

By passing and sending to conference appropriations packages carrying bills the House has not considered as stand-alone measures, the Senate will have the advantage in negotiations, since it will have established a position on spending issues on which the House has not acted.

So the guys who refused to do their budget homework over the past two years will now have the advantage of unilaterally controlling the process that they callously disregarded!

By now, you might be pondering the obvious question: how can Harry Reid unilaterally force the House to accept bundled pork in a conference report?

Answer: he can’t.  He is getting help from his Republican counterparts.

As the CQ story indicates, Mitch McConnell and his friends are in a rush to complete the FY2012 spending bills.  As such, he is willing to give Reid the keys to the house.  But, fear not, Reid is allowing Senate Republicans a chance to offer amendments to the minibus bills:

So far, the Senate strategy has been a bipartisan exercise. Reid has won significant support from Republicans for the first «minibus» by allowing about two dozen senators to offer amendments. Maintaining that relatively open process as the other spending packages are considered will be crucial to winning enough GOP support to move them through the Senate.

However, there is one problem with this deal.  Republicans are relinquishing their opportunity to offer amendments in the majority-controlled House, in lieu of the chance to offer amendments that will invariably be defeated in the Senate.

It is astounding that Republicans are so obsequious to Reid just a few weeks after Reid pulled the nuclear option, barring Republicans from offering amendments without his permissions.  So much for the promises to shut down the Senate.

While Senate Republicans are caving to Reid’s power grab, there is no reason for House Republicans to follow suit.  They must reject any bundled appropriations bills that thwart the amendment process and undermine House priorities.  Although the topline discretionary spending figure is already locked in at $1.043 trillion, as a result of the debt ceiling deal, there are still many important policy issues that must be solved, especially regarding health, labor, and the environment.

Moreover, while the overall spending figure is already fixed, the individual spending levels have not been determined.  Why not?  Well, the Senate has never passed a budget yet.  Republicans must refuse to be held hostage by those who never passed a budget, yet hypocritically seek to manipulate the process late in the game.

COMMENTS

  • toothpick

    Can we get names of the Republican Senators who are cooperating with Reid? So we know who to primary (if they aren’t being primaried already).

    • http://redmeatconservative.blogspot.com/ Daniel Horowitz

      is the man at the top of the Senate Republican food chain.

      • kestrel

        …12th wealthiest member of the U.S. Senate, whose fortune increased by $800,002 in 2008, who from 2003 to 2008 counted 5 financial/investment firms among his top 20 campaign donors, and whose top three donating industries over his senate career have been: Lawyers ($1.5 million), Securities and Investments ($1.5 million), and Health Professionals ($1.4 million) — that 800-pound gorilla?

        (all from Wikipedia, and I assume it’s correct, since our budget-free senators have enough spare time on their hands to presumably correct their Wiki bios if they so care to do so)

  • carolina

    or we will continue to be trapped into ‘compromises’ that are way too one-sided.
    I find dems so disgusting …… that I don’t even like to think about them. ugh

    • YnotNOW

      A Republican majority in the Senate may prove a thorn in the side of conservatives, as too many of them are “establishment” types and don’t adhere to conservative principles anyway.

      That’s why I support Sen DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund, because even after we replace the Dems, we have “less bad” R’s who need to be replaced with better ones.

    • toothpick

      I would distinguish between the two. Certainly not mutually exclusive, but (unfortunately) lots of non-overlapping areas between GOP and Conservatives.

      • YnotNOW

        There is no way Conservatives can take the Senate in one election cycle. Just getting R’s in control, as a step in the right direction, is a huge improvement. But with only 1/3 the Senate up for re-election, and many of them “safe” seats (especially several of the Dem seats this cycle), we cannot replace everyone all at once.

        Be prepared. We will continue to be disappointed for several more years. Take the first step, stay with the program, and continue to replace the “establishment types” year after year, until you have a renewal of the country.

        Just warning you to expect the long battle ;)

  • drfredc

    Who could have seen this coming? The GOP LOSERship that largely resides in the US Senate is proceeding full speed ahead, pedal to the medal stuck on stupid.

    Aren’t these are pretty much same silly LOSERship spending clowns that were in charge of the GOP Congress during the Bush years?

  • patlandy

    Every one of the Congressmen who voted a budget out of the House should be holding a DAILY PRESS CONFERENCE to call out their respective Senators for not voting on a budget!!
    This will draw attention the the Senators from BOTH PARTIES that are not legislating in the interest of their constituents….

    • After Seven

      FWIW: Tom Bauer and Gary Rose have addressed this exact issue on their Sirius/XM Sunday radio show about 100 times in the last 2 years. They claim that Boehner, Cantor and McConnell are out there every single day hitting the mics and the MSM won’t run their press conferences. I have no idea if its true or not but thats what they say.

  • After Seven

    Like Many, I have been disgusted with the GOP Senate since the Amnesty debacle of 2007, Kagan, Sotomayor, The Start Treaty, The Food Bill of 2010 etc. This is just one more act of submission in a long line of acts of submission to libs and their ideologies.

    So now we will reward Reid for his utter failure to comply with Budget Laws? Throw away an election issue with both hands? When we could hang them with their own indolence?

    Its things like this where I see very little convergence of values with Brown, Snowe, Collins, McConnell, Lugar, Murkowski, Graham, McCain, Alexander, Hatch …among others off the top of my head. The point is…do their values reflect yours, and if not, why support them? I’m so tired of getting a knife in the back. In this target rich environment of Big Govt Corruption and failed Liberalism, this is what we get?

    I’m not certain retaking the Senate should be a priority, if we can’t get 60 will it matter? Will a GOP Senate Majority merely usher in another era of Rino-ism that tarnishes the Conservative Brand for the next decade? Would the better long term strategy be to purge the Rino’s at all costs? Its clear to me that GOP Senate and House Leadership didn’t get the 2010 memo. In an age that calls for Conservative Titans we have none.

    So essentially we must put our trust in the House? I see little evidence that our previous trust in the House has yielded any dividends whatsoever. Grim days indeed.

  • daniel22

    of why we must elect principled leaders and not just experienced politicians. Obviously the main players are experienced and just obvious is the fact that principles have no place in their actions. I want to know the names of the republicans that are enabling this to go on.

  • kestrel

    House leadership cringes at the thought of any protracted conflict, yet the months-long fight over the debt ceiling hurt Obama more than it did congress, and didn’t it run the clock? Likewise, trying up Obama over ObamaCare for eight months was worth it, imo, even though the bill eventually passed.

    I can’t blame Republicans for not liking these protracted conflicts, but, really, in their unwillingness to face a government shutdown, isn’t this trench warfare what they have chosen? (By default?) And isn’t it their job? The voters could not have been any clearer in 2010. I am close to speechless.

  • edintexas

    Republicans with neither principles, nor cojones. Aren’t we surprised?