The Long Budget Nightmare Is Over

They grumbled a bit, but senators passed the compromise budget deal.

Members of the bipartisan budget conference Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (L) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) discuss their initial meeting at the U.S. Capitol October 17, 2013 in Washington, DC. Congress voted last night to fund the federal budget and increase the nation's debt limit, ending a 16-day government shutdown. 
Getty Images
Michael Catalin and Sarah Mimms
Add to Briefcase
Michael Catalin Sarah Mimms
Dec. 18, 2013, 11:56 a.m.

They called it “small.” They called it “flawed.” But Con­gress passed a two-year budget deal, end­ing months of ac­ri­mony on Cap­it­ol Hill and en­sur­ing that the New Year will ring in with far less chance of a gov­ern­ment shut­down.

The Sen­ate passed the Bi­par­tis­an Budget Act of 2013 on a 64-36 vote Wed­nes­day, send­ing the bill to Pres­id­ent Obama’s desk, where he has said he’ll sign it.

The mod­est deal, cooked up by Sen­ate Budget Chair­wo­man Patty Mur­ray and House Budget Chair­man Paul Ry­an, sets top-line spend­ing levels for the gov­ern­ment through Oc­to­ber 2015, while re­du­cing se­quest­ra­tion cuts by $63 bil­lion over the next two years.

When asked how she felt after the bill she worked on for nine months fi­nally passed the Sen­ate, Mur­ray was char­ac­ter­ist­ic­ally brief. “I am good,” she said. When pressed for more in­form­a­tion, she ad­ded: “I’m glad that we have giv­en some con­tinu­ity back to the Amer­ic­an people.”

The bill sets top-line spend­ing for the re­mainder of fisc­al year 2014 at $1.012 tril­lion — the halfway point between the Demo­crat­ic and Re­pub­lic­an budgets. Now that it has passed, con­gres­sion­al ap­pro­pri­at­ors can form­ally be­gin the task of fund­ing the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment.

Sen­ate Ap­pro­pri­ations Chair­wo­man Bar­bara Mikul­ski; her House coun­ter­part, Rep. Har­old Ro­gers; and their sub­com­mit­tee chairs have already be­gun dis­cus­sions and will be work­ing through the hol­i­days to craft a 12-bill om­ni­bus pack­age that Con­gress will ad­dress when law­makers re­turn in Janu­ary. The cur­rent fund­ing mech­an­ism, a con­tinu­ing res­ol­u­tion passed at the end of the Oc­to­ber shut­down, ex­pires Jan. 15.

But while the budget bill will al­low ap­pro­pri­at­ors to do their work and lend some cer­tainty to busi­nesses and fed­er­al agen­cies, it has drawn cri­ti­cism for fail­ing to ad­dress some of the na­tion’s long-term fisc­al is­sues, in­clud­ing en­ti­tle­ment spend­ing, the debt ceil­ing, and tax re­form.

Sen. Mike Jo­hanns, R-Neb., who is re­tir­ing next year, op­posed the budget bill Wed­nes­day, say­ing he wor­ries that while the deal has likely pre­ven­ted a shut­down in Janu­ary when the cur­rent con­tinu­ing res­ol­u­tion ex­pires, it has taken the pres­sure off Con­gress to deal with big-pic­ture items.

“The pres­sure is off now. Noth­ing will hap­pen for the next 24 months. No en­ti­tle­ment re­form. There’ll be no ser­i­ous budget dis­cus­sion, be­cause now we’re on auto-pi­lot for the next two years,” Jo­hanns said Wed­nes­day.

But in a Con­gress that has failed to ac­com­plish most of its ma­jor goals in 2013, even passing a small-ball budget agree­ment was deemed a suc­cess by sev­er­al law­makers.

“I think the ma­jor­ity of Amer­ic­ans are sur­prised that there’s any agree­ment,” Sen. John Mc­Cain, R-Ar­iz., said on the Sen­ate floor while prais­ing Mur­ray Wed­nes­day.

Though the bill passed with a ma­jor­ity of the ma­jor­ity in both cham­bers, not every­one is happy with its con­tents. Demo­crats in both cham­bers have com­plained loudly that it does not ex­tend un­em­ploy­ment-in­sur­ance be­ne­fits, which ex­pire on Dec. 28.

And sev­er­al sen­at­ors in both parties are con­cerned about a pro­vi­sion that will re­duce be­ne­fits for re­tired vet­er­ans. A cadre of law­makers are already push­ing le­gis­la­tion to elim­in­ate the pen­sion cuts, and the Sen­ate Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee has vowed to take up the meas­ure next year.

“I have no doubt. We will re­peal it. OK? Without a doubt,” Mc­Cain, a mem­ber of the Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee, said Wed­nes­day. “I prom­ise.”

In the mean­time, Mur­ray and a bi­par­tis­an group of sen­at­ors plan to in­tro­duce a tech­nic­al fix that will ex­empt dis­abled vet­er­ans from the pen­sion changes. A vote on that change could come as soon as Thursday, and Mur­ray al­lies be­lieve that it could pass eas­ily un­der un­an­im­ous con­sent. The ques­tion is wheth­er the meas­ure will make it to the floor.

“We’re run­ning in­to the same prob­lem that every­body is right now, which is that a there’s a cer­tain num­ber of Re­pub­lic­ans that are in­tent on block­ing everything,” a Sen­ate Demo­crat­ic aide said.

That meas­ure has the sup­port of Ry­an, as well as oth­er House Re­pub­lic­ans, ac­cord­ing to the aide. However, it will not be paid for, adding $600 mil­lion to the budget’s price tag.

Re­pub­lic­ans, mean­while, are push­ing to end the cuts for all re­tired mil­it­ary per­son­nel. One pro­pos­al from Sens. Ro­ger Wick­er, R-Miss., and Lind­sey Gra­ham, R-S.C., among oth­ers, would pay for it through a pro­vi­sion in Obama’s 2014 budget pro­pos­al that would tight­en the proof-of-eli­gib­il­ity re­quire­ments for in­di­vidu­als re­ceiv­ing the Earned In­come Tax Cred­it.

“What I’m hear­ing around here is a lot of agree­ment that it needs to get fixed,” said Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H. “My hope is that it will hap­pen pretty quickly, that we’ll get to­geth­er on a bi­par­tis­an basis with the House.”

Des­pite Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id’s pre­dic­tions this week that the deal would ush­er in a new era of bi­par­tis­an­ship among sen­at­ors, Re­pub­lic­ans are ad­opt­ing a starkly dif­fer­ent view, frus­trated that they can­not of­fer amend­ments on most le­gis­la­tion and can no longer block pres­id­en­tial nom­in­ees since Demo­crats in­voked the so-called nuc­le­ar op­tion.

“The fact that this dis­crim­in­at­ory cut in pen­sions for act­ive duty mil­it­ary can’t be fixed be­cause Sen­at­or Re­id won’t al­low any amend­ments to something that would en­joy broad bi­par­tis­an sup­port says a lot about how broken the Sen­ate is,” said Minor­ity Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas. “I think the Sen­ate is as di­vided as it has ever been, and it’s thanks to Sen­at­or Re­id.”

What We're Following See More »
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
4 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
COMMISSIONERS NEED TO DELIBERATE MORE
FCC Pushes Vote on Set-Top Boxes
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Federal regulators on Thursday delayed a vote on a proposal to reshape the television market by freeing consumers from cable box rentals, putting into doubt a plan that has pitted technology companies against cable television providers. ... The proposal will still be considered for a future vote. But Tom Wheeler, chairman of the F.C.C., said commissioners needed more discussions."

Source:
UNTIL DEC. 9, ANYWAY
Obama Signs Bill to Fund Government
9 hours ago
THE LATEST
REDSKINS IMPLICATIONS
SCOTUS to Hear Case on Offensive Trademarks
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

"The Supreme Court is taking up a First Amendment clash over the government’s refusal to register offensive trademarks, a case that could affect the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices agreed Thursday to hear a dispute involving an Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but they did not act on a separate request to hear the higher-profile Redskins case at the same time." Still, any precedent set by the case could have ramifications for the Washington football team.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Bannon Still Collecting Royalties from ‘Seinfeld’
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The Hollywood Reporter takes a look at a little-known intersection of politics and entertainment, in which Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon is still raking in residuals from Seinfeld. Here's the digest version: When Seinfeld was in its infancy, Ted Turner was in the process of acquiring its production company, Castle Rock, but he was under-capitalized. Bannon's fledgling media company put up the remaining funds, and he agreed to "participation rights" instead of a fee. "Seinfeld has reaped more than $3 billion in its post-network afterlife through syndication deals." Meanwhile, Bannon is "still cashing checks from Seinfeld, and observers say he has made nearly 25 times more off the Castle Rock deal than he had anticipated."

Source:
×