The Other Budget Battle
I have to begin today with two apologies. The first is for writing about essentially the same subject for three days in a row. I do realize there are plenty of other things going on right now (European leaders visiting the White House, for one), so to focus solely on the budget process in Congress is a bit limiting. My second apology is for misunderstanding something in my last two columns, which is why I'm writing this one (for clarification).
What I got wrong (through a mistaken assumption on my part) is that there are actually two tracks to the budget battles in Congress right now. I have been conflating them into one, but this is not the case. What the House passed this week is a budget framework for the upcoming fiscal year, which won't start until October. It has nothing to do with this fiscal year at all -- that's the second track (that I missed).
I realized my mistake today when I saw a headline in Politico which read: "Lawmakers Start Work On Yearlong Funding Patch." My confusion stemmed from my assumption that Congress was already working on this, since a deadline is staring them in the face. Apparently not, though:
The Senate's top appropriator said Thursday she has been instructed by the Trump administration and GOP leadership to start prepping a stopgap spending bill to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year.
It's the clearest sign yet that bipartisan negotiations around a 12-bill funding deal are in trouble ahead of the March 14 deadline to avoid a shutdown.
Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) told a small group of reporters Thursday that she was asked to start working on the funding patch -- known as a "continuing resolution," or a CR -- and said in a later interview that it was "one option" being pursued ahead of a looming lapse in funding for federal programs in just over two weeks.
Got that? Even though March 14th is less than three weeks away, they're just starting work on a continuing resolution. This seems to be a prime example of putting the legislative cart before the horse, at least to me. There is no looming deadline to get next year's budget framework passed, but that's what they decided to focus on first.
This is going to be a big fight in Congress, since the continuing resolution is not a "budget reconciliation" bill -- meaning it will have to get 60 votes to survive a Senate filibuster. Democrats are pushing to include in this bill language to rein in President Elon Musk's chainsawing of the federal government -- which Republicans are likely to reject. But now the Republicans want to head in the other direction:
Senior Republicans are seriously exploring how to include cuts made by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency in an upcoming government funding bill -- a move that would skyrocket tensions with Democrats and drastically raise the potential for a government shutdown.
. . .
[T]he idea would be to codify some of the "most egregious" examples of alleged waste that DOGE has identified and incorporate them into a government funding patch through the end of the fiscal year. Republicans would then dare Democrats to vote against the package, lest they be blamed for causing a shutdown come the March 14 deadline.
The strategy, if adopted, could help satisfy conservative hard-liners who are already upset Congress is hurtling toward another short-term spending patch. But it would scramble the politics of the looming shutdown fight considerably, alienating Democrats whose votes are needed to ensure passage given the narrow Republican majorities in both chambers.
This is also not likely to work, since getting seven Democrats to vote for such an idea in the Senate is nothing short of a pipe dream. However, Democrats using the threat of a government shutdown to force a "clean" C.R. (one without codifying Musk's efforts) may not be very effective at all.
What normally happens in a government shutdown is that the public gets frustrated and eventually Congress is forced to pass a budget bill (usually a clean one, on somewhat bipartisan lines). But seriously, would anyone even notice a shutdown right now, in the midst of all the destruction Musk is causing?
That's not as ridiculous an idea as it might first seem. Musk would probably cheer on a shutdown, leading President (In Name Only) Donald Trump to also start cheering, which would strengthen the resolve of the Republicans in Congress. And all of them would be blaming Democrats for the mess, which usually doesn't work -- but who knows what will work in today's chaotic political atmosphere.
To get a resolution passed on time is going to require Congress to move incredibly quickly. If it devolves into a fight over Elon Musk, however, the likelihood of a shutdown happening goes way up. It will be interesting to see this all play out over the next two weeks, because (much to my surprise) the process is only now getting started (and my apologies, again, for the misunderstanding).
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Leave a Reply
[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]
You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.
[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]