Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
Spending deal gets GOP lift
But Democratic votes uncertain
WASHINGTON — House Republicans signaled support Wednesday for a budget deal worked out a day earlier, a plan narrowly drawn but promoted as a way to stabilize Congress’ erratic fiscal efforts, avert another government shutdown and mute some of the partisan rancor that has damaged Americans’ attitudes about their lawmakers.
“There’s a lot to like about it,” said one GOP congressman, John Fleming of Louisiana, as he emerged from a private caucus meeting.
The plan provides $63 billion in short-term relief from painful automatic spending cuts and counters that with $85 billion in spending cuts and new fees over the coming decade. Congress is expected to enact the savings measure this year and follow up with a huge spending bill next month.
GOP critics faulted the measure for increasing deficits for the next three years and complained that much of its deficit savings would come near the end of its 10-year projections. An estimate by the Congressional
Budget Office says that the deal would add $23 billion to the deficit for the ongoing 2014 budget year and add another $22.3 billion over the 2015-16 time frame.
About 80 percent, or $68 billion, of the plan’s $85 billion in spending cuts and fees would come in the pact’s final three years. Just $11 billion would accrue in the first three years, an amount that’s far exceeded by new spending permitted this year and next.
Supporters insisted the plan, while imperfect, is at least a step in the right direction.
Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., said most Republicans would back the deal worked out by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington — and applauded by the White House.
“A lot of folks will probably vote for it even though they would rather not support this type of legislation, but we have to get the spending issue completed so that there is some consistency in the future,” Miller said.
After Wednesday’s meeting, House Republicans Tom Cole of Oklahoma and Matt Salmon of Arizona separately said the budget will pass.
The House plans to vote on the measure today.
There was some grumbling from both liberals and conservatives since the plan wouldn’t solve long- term tax and spending issues and ignores expiring unemployment benefits.
Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., said he’ll oppose the agreement. It “cancels earlier spending reductions, instead of making some tough decisions about how to tackle our long-term fiscal challenges caused by runaway Washington spending,” he said in an emailed statement.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., also announced his opposition, saying that “undoing tens of billions of this modest spending restraint is shameful and must be opposed.”
But House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, dismissed criticism from groups such as Heritage Action, which raise money as they disparage Republicans for being insufficiently conservative.
“They’re using our members, and they’re using the American people for their own goals, this is ridiculous,” Boehner said Wednesday. “If you’re for more deficit reduction, you’re for this agreement.”
Matt Kibbe, president of FreedomWorks, another conservative group, responded later.
“I don’t think that John Boehner’s problem is with FreedomWorks or Heritage Action,” Kibbe said. “His problem is with the very voters that were told that Republicans were fiscally responsible.”
Many House Democrats were less than enthusiastic about the deal, too.
“Stay tuned,” said Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., when asked about whether Democrats would support the bill.
But the White House issued a statement Wednesday praising the bill for “critical investments in areas such as education, infrastructure, and scientific research, while keeping the Nation on the path to long-term deficit reduction.”
The agreement, among other things, seeks to restore $63 billion in automatic spending cuts affecting programs ranging from parks to the Pentagon. The deal to ease those cuts for two years is aimed less at chipping away at the nation’s $17 trillion national debt than it is at trying to help a dysfunctional Capitol stop lurching from crisis to crisis. It would set the stage for action in January on a $1 trillion-plus spending bill for the budget year that began in October.
The measure unveiled by Ryan and Murray blends $85 billion in spending cuts and revenue from new and extended fees — but no taxes or cuts to Medicare beneficiaries — to replace a significant amount of the mandated cuts to agency budgets over the next two years.
The package would raise the Transportation Security Administration fee on a typical nonstop, round-trip airline ticket from $5 to $10; require newly hired federal workers to contribute 1.3 percentage points more of their salaries toward their pensions; and trim cost-of-living adjustments to the pensions of military retirees under the age of 62. Hospitals and other health-care providers would have to absorb two additional years of a 2 percentage-point cut in Medicare reimbursements.
Meanwhile, lawmakers said Wednesday that they were close to a deal on a farm bill, although the prospects of getting it passed before Congress adjourns for the holidays next week are low.
Members of the House and Senate have been meeting regularly to reconcile their different versions of a farm bill, which expires at the end of the month.
They agree on many things, including expanding crop insurance for farmers, but remain far apart on issues like cuts to the food-stamp program. A House proposal would cut about $40 billion from the program, while a Senate version would trim roughly $4.5 billion, mainly by making administrative changes.
Despite the differences, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D- Mich., chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., who heads the House Agriculture Committee, said they have made significant gains in trying to work out a deal that would pass both the House and the Senate.
The two lawmakers differ on what to do if they cannot get a deal in place before Congress leaves. Lucas has proposed extending the current farm bill, first passed in 2008 and extended last year, through January. He said in a statement that it would be the “responsible thing to do given our tight deadline.”
The House leadership has signaled that it is open to an extension. But Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the majority leader, and Stabenow said they are opposed to extending the current bill.
Stabenow said an extension could allow direct payments, which are made to farmers and farmland owners who may or may not grow crops, to continue for another year. The much-criticized program costs about $5 billion a year, and both the House and the Senate farm bills would eliminate it.