Republicans and Democrats Reach 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.
National Journal
Sarah Mimms, Billy House and Tim Alberta
Add to Briefcase
Sarah Mimms and Billy House Tim Alberta
Dec. 10, 2013, 11:41 a.m.

Budget ne­go­ti­at­ors on Tues­day night an­nounced they’ve reached a two-year deal that sets spend­ing for the cur­rent fisc­al year at $1.012 tril­lion and would provide $63 bil­lion in se­quester re­lief — all without new tax rev­en­ue.

“I’m proud of this agree­ment,” said Re­pub­lic­an Rep. Paul Ry­an, one of the two prin­cip­al ne­go­ti­at­ors, in a state­ment shortly be­fore an even­ing news con­fer­ence. “It re­duces the de­fi­cit — without rais­ing taxes. And it cuts spend­ing in a smarter way. It’s a firm step in the right dir­ec­tion, and I ask all my col­leagues in the House to sup­port it.”

Sen. Patty Mur­ray, who handled the ne­go­ti­ations for Demo­crats, said, “This agree­ment breaks through the re­cent dys­func­tion to pre­vent an­oth­er gov­ern­ment shut­down and roll back se­quest­ra­tion’s cuts to de­fense and do­mest­ic in­vest­ments in a bal­anced way.”  

The deal, be­ing dubbed the Bi­par­tis­an Budget Act of 2013, will still have to get the go-ahead of rank-and-file law­makers in both parties. The House is set to ad­journ at the end of the week, and Re­pub­lic­ans there are ex­pec­ted to meet be­hind closed doors Wed­nes­day morn­ing, as their lead­ers eye a floor vote by Fri­day.  

The pro­posed pack­age would set over­all dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing an­nu­al­ized for the cur­rent fisc­al year at $1.012 tril­lion. That’s about mid­way between the level of $1.058 tril­lion pro­posed in the Sen­ate’s budget, and the House-pro­posed budget level of $967 bil­lion.

The deal would bring fisc­al 2015 spend­ing to about $1.014 tril­lion. The plan does not deal with the debt ceil­ing, which is an­ti­cip­ated to be reached some­time after Feb. 7.

The agree­ment also would provide $63 bil­lion in se­quester re­lief over two years, split evenly between de­fense and nondefense pro­grams. In fisc­al 2014, de­fense dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing would be set at $520.5 bil­lion, and nondefense dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing would be set at $491.8 bil­lion.

In fisc­al 2014, de­fense dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing would be set at $520.5 bil­lion, and nondefense dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing would be set at $491.8 bil­lion.

The se­quester re­lief is de­scribed as be­ing fully off­set by sav­ings else­where in the budget.

The agree­ment in­cludes dozens of spe­cif­ic de­fi­cit-re­duc­tion pro­vi­sions, with man­dat­ory sav­ings and non-tax rev­en­ue total­ing roughly $85 bil­lion, al­though de­tails of how these sav­ings would be real­ized were not im­me­di­ately re­leased. The agree­ment would re­duce the de­fi­cit by between $20 bil­lion and $23 bil­lion.

Some con­ser­vat­ives have re­cently voiced op­pos­i­tion to swap­ping out se­quester cuts for “user fees,” while lib­er­als have cri­ti­cized any deal that does not ex­tend un­em­ploy­ment in­sur­ance.

A po­ten­tial ma­jor stick­ing point for some law­makers could be that one meas­ure be­ing used to help pay for ad­ded spend­ing is in­creased premi­ums for pen­sion plans backed by the Pen­sion Be­ne­fit Guar­anty Corp.

However, the pack­age also does not in­clude an ex­ten­sion of un­em­ploy­ment be­ne­fits, due to ex­pire at the end of Decem­ber — something Demo­crats have been cham­pioned.

Rep. Steve Is­rael, chair­man of the Demo­crat­ic Con­gres­sion­al Cam­paign Com­mit­tee, said Tues­day af­ter­noon that he can’t say wheth­er House Demo­crats will be on board.

“We’re still feel­ing our way through this,” he said. “Some of the com­pon­ents may be a hard sell for House Re­pub­lic­ans. So, we need to find out where they are, and where we are.”

House Re­pub­lic­ans have let it be known they have a con­tin­gency plan in place.

“Part of our con­ver­sa­tion was on the short-term piece,” Rep. James Lank­ford, the Re­pub­lic­an Policy chair­man, said Tues­day af­ter­noon. “If this [budget] deal doesn’t pass, we’ve got to have a short-term piece ready to get to­geth­er and get out there.”

Cor­rec­tion: A pre­vi­ous ver­sion mis­stated the status of the pen­sion pro­vi­sion.

What We're Following See More »
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
12 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:
UNTIL DEC. 9, ANYWAY
Obama Signs Bill to Fund Government
18 hours ago
THE LATEST
IT’S ALL CLINTON
Reliable Poll Data Coming in RE: Debate #1
20 hours ago
WHY WE CARE
WHAT WILL PASS?
McConnell Doubts Criminal Justice Reform Can Pass This Year
22 hours ago
THE LATEST
ALSO FIRED UNATTRACTIVE WAITRESSES
Trump Did Business with Cuba
23 hours ago
THE LATEST

Today in bad news for Donald Trump:

  • Newsweek found that a company he controlled did business with Cuba under Fidel Castro "despite strict American trade bans that made such undertakings illegal, according to interviews with former Trump executives, internal company records and court filings." In 1998, he spent at least $68,000 there, which was funneled through a consluting company "to make it appear legal."
  • The Los Angeles Times reports that at a golf club he owns in California, Trump ordered that unattractive female staff be fired and replaced with prettier women.
×