Democrats, Obama part on $1.1T spending bill
|
House
Speaker John Boehner of Ohio holds what may be his last news conference
of the 113th Congress, though critical legislation is still pending,
Thursday, Dec. 11, 2014, on Capitol Hill in Washington. With a midnight
Thursday deadline to keep the government running, a $1.1 trillion
government-wide spending bill is teetering as many lawmakers find more
in the measure to dislike than like. Boehner expressed confidence the
measure would go through and he said he was looking forward to what he
called "the new American Congress" that convenes in January with a
Republican majority in the House and the Senate. |
WASHINGTON
(AP) -- Joined in an unlikely alliance, the Obama White House and House
Republicans worked into the night Thursday in a furious attempt to pass a
$1.1 trillion governmentwide spending bill over clamorous protests from
Democrats who said it would ease bank regulations imposed after the
near-economic collapse of 2008.
House
Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi delivered a rare public rebuke to
President Barack Obama, saying she was "enormously disappointed" he had
decided to embrace legislation that she described as an attempt at
blackmail by Republicans.
The White House
noted its own objections to the bank-related proposal in a written
statement. Even so, officials said Obama and Vice President Joe Biden
were both calling Democrats in an attempt to secure enough votes for
passage of the broader measure, which combined government spending and a
new course for selected, highly shaky pension plans.
The
outbreak of Democratic bickering left Republicans in the unusual
position of bystanders rather than participants with the federal
government due to run out of funds at midnight.
Even
so, there appeared to be no threat of a shutdown in federal services.
Instead, a bill providing a 48-hour extension to existing funding was
ready for passage if necessary as the two-year Congress neared an end.
As
the nominal midnight deadline neared, Republicans reconvened the House
with plans to call for a vote on both the $1.1 trillion measure and the
stop-gap bill as well.
Hours earlier,
conservatives had sought to torpedo the measure because it would leave
Obama's immigration policy unchallenged. Speaker John Boehner patrolled
the noisy, crowded House floor looking for enough GOP converts to keep
it afloat.
He found them - after the vote to
move ahead on the bill went into overtime - in retiring Rep. Kerry
Bentivolio of Michigan as well as Rep. Marlin Stutzman of Indiana. The
vote was 214-212.
Even so, Republican
defections required Boehner and supporters of the measure to seek
Democratic votes for passage. "Remember this bill was put together in a
bicameral, bipartisan way," he said. Officials in both parties have said
Pelosi was fully aware of the bill's contents before it was made public
and did not signal her opposition.
If there
was political drama in the House, there was something approaching
tenderness in the Senate, where several lawmakers are ending their
careers. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., choked up as he delivered a farewell
speech from his desk, and Republicans and Democrats alike rose to
applaud him when he finished speaking.
The
spending measure was one of a handful on the year-end agenda, with the
others ranging from an extension of expiring tax breaks to a bill
approving Obama's policy for arming Syrian forces fighting Islamic State
forces.
The $1.1 trillion legislation would
provide funding for nearly the entire government through the end of the
budget year next Sept. 30, and lock in cuts negotiated in recent years
between the White House and a tea party-heavy Republican rank and file.
The
only exception is the Department of Homeland Security. It is funded
only through Feb. 27, when the specter of a shutdown will be absent and
Republicans hope to force the president to roll back an immigration
policy that promises work visas to an estimated 5 million immigrants
living in the country illegally.
When Congress
convenes in January, Republicans will have control of the Senate for
the first time in eight years and will hold their strongest majority in
the House in more than eight decades.
A
provision in the big bill relating to financially failing multi-employer
pension plans would allow cuts for current retirees, and supporters
said it was part of an effort to prevent a slow-motion collapse of a
system that provides retirement income to millions.
"The
multi-employer pension system is a ticking time bomb," said Rep. John
Kline, R-Minn., who negotiated the agreement privately with Democratic
Rep. George Miller of California, who is retiring after 40 years in
Congress.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.
estimates that the fund that backs multi-employer plans is about $42.4
billion short of the money needed to cover benefits for plans that have
failed or will fail.
Miller said the
legislation would give retirees the right to vote in advance whether to
enter a restructuring that could cut their benefits. He, Kline and
others said the alternative to the legislation might be an even deeper
reduction in benefits.
More than 10 million
people are covered by multi-employer plans, which involve agreements
between labor unions and groups of companies, mostly in construction and
transportation.
The legislation drew a mixed
reaction from unions and the opposition of the AARP, but the White House
written statement on the legislation did not mention it as a concern.
The
White House did raise objections to a provision that would roll back
one of the regulations imposed on the financial industry after the
economic near-collapse of 2008, and to a separate element of the bill
that would permit wealthy contributors to increase the size of their
donations to political parties for national conventions, election
recounts or the construction of a headquarters building.
Democrats
cited the same issues, but Boehner on Wednesday rejected their request
to jettison either or both of the provisions. Republicans noted that 70
members of the Democratic rank and file supported easing the bank
regulations on a stand-alone vote in October of last year.
Remarkably, there was relatively little controversy about the spending levels themselves that form the heart of the bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.