It’s supposed to be a committee of 29 separate voices from the House and Senate. But the early signals from the inaugural meeting of the bipartisan House and Senate budget conference are that it may operate more like a committee of two: Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Patty Murray.
Ryan said Wednesday that the committee won’t be formally sitting down as a group again until Nov. 13 — a fact that seemed to catch even some of the panel’s members by surprise. That leaves barely a month before the panel’s Dec. 13 deadline to report its recommendations back to Congress.
“That is a huge concern to me,” said Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore. “The American people expect us to be getting into the nitty-gritty, not just giving opening statements and checking out for two weeks.”
Ryan said the lack of formal committee meetings before mid-November was because House and Senate schedules don’t overlap until then.
But several members of the committee, charged with keeping the government funded past Jan. 15 and avoiding another shutdown, said the weeks between now and Thanksgiving are crucial to getting work done. Finishing before Thanksgiving could allow more time for the House and Senate to reach agreement, and give appropriators time to craft individual spending bills or a larger omnibus package.
“When you look at the hourglass “¦ the time between now and Thanksgiving is crucial,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.
Not that all committee members didn’t get a chance to express themselves in opening statements Wednesday. One after the other, they spoke before the cameras, though the meeting was largely overshadowed by testimony taking place elsewhere over Obamacare. Their statements were marked by words like “together” and “compromise” and “agree.”
Yet the two chambers are still sharply divided on the issues, such as new tax revenues and changes to entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security.
The notion of a “grand bargain” that could tackle changes to entitlements, overhaul the tax code, and cut trillions from the national debt is being downplayed as highly unlikely, something both Ryan and Murray indicated in their opening statements and before.
Instead, the focus is on finding some way to soften the next round of sequester cuts and forging a spending plan through Sept. 30, 2014 (the rest of the current fiscal year) that would go beyond simply extending existing funding levels.
“Nobody has to abandon their principles,” said Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman. “Instead, we need to find out where our principles overlap. We won’t solve all our problems “¦ so let’s focus on achievable goals. Let’s find common ground.”
Murray, the Senate Budget Committee chair, said, “This won’t be easy — the House and Senate budgets are very different even for just this year. But if both sides are willing to move out of their partisan corners and offer up some compromises, I am confident it can be done.”
Murray said the committee will be working between now and the next conference meeting. “Obviously we all need to get it done fairly quickly. The time is very short,” she said.
But with no plans now to meet again until Nov. 13 — and pressure to deliver progress by Thanksgiving — it appears evident that not all 29 members of the committee will be instrumental in the real negotiations.
Budget experts, including Steve Pruitt, a former House Budget Committee Democratic staff director, say most of the work of House and Senate conferences—especially a budget conference—typically gets done in private discussions between the House and Senate chairs, the ranking members, and at the staff level.
“That’s where the progress will be — in the private conversations,” said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla. “You’ll have some parameters by then. Then you’ve got another month to finalize it. “
Merkley acknowledged that budget leaders are preparing for conversations behind the scenes but argued that provides limited opportunity to work together. “I’m sure that is certainly part of it,” he said. “But maybe having regular public gatherings would also help drive more speed behind the scenes.”
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told his colleagues in a statement, “The deliberations and deal-making shouldn’t be done in the dead of night in a backroom with only a small handful of individuals.”
Grassley said some of the public cynicism regarding Washington “comes from the fact that many of the recent budget deals have been concocted in a back office by a few leaders, and rank and file members were left to take it or leave it. They weren’t debated. There was no deliberation. And nearly no one had an opportunity beforehand to even read them.”
Whatever emerges will require the approval of majority of the committee’s members before it can be sent as a recommendation to the full House and Senate.
Meanwhile, Wednesday’s opening hearing did little to reset what have been relatively low expectations before the conference committee ever gaveled in. Ryan has said he is not seeking a grand bargain, and Democrats have further lowered the bar for success in recent days by making clear they are focused on trying to find a budget agreement for fiscal 2014 — not one that extends for 10 years — and finding an alternative to the sequester cuts.
Some conference members said they would consider even small achievements major victories in the current environment.
“Let’s get some of our more immediate issues resolved,” said Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho. “Let’s lay some foundation and some progress for moving towards the bigger solutions. I think there is a little different expectation this time and hopefully it’s one where we can be successful.”
What We're Following See More »
Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:
- Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
- Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
- They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
- One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”
Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”
The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”
At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”