This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/congresss-hodgepodge-omnibus-government-funding-bill-is-likely-to-pass/2014/12/11/eb519bc6-80ae-11e4-8882-03cf08410beb_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Congress’s hodgepodge omnibus government funding bill is likely to pass A productive week for an unproductive Congress
(3 days later)
In a single bill this week, Congress will attempt to fund almost the entire federal government, rewrite Wall Street regulations, expand political contribution limits, create a new manufacturing network and, among many other things, override the District’s new marijuana law. In a single bill, in a single week, Congress funded almost the entire federal government, rewrote Wall Street regulations, expanded political contribution limits, created a new manufacturing network and, among many other things, overrode portions of the District’s new marijuana law.
“We’re doing more in eight days than we did all year,” said Rep. James P. Moran (D-Va.), a retiring lawmaker who supports the 1,600-page measure.“We’re doing more in eight days than we did all year,” said Rep. James P. Moran (D-Va.), a retiring lawmaker who supports the 1,600-page measure.
“I hate it, I hate it, I hate it, I hate it,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime opponent of year-end bills packed with disparate items under a must-pass banner.“I hate it, I hate it, I hate it, I hate it,” said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime opponent of year-end bills packed with disparate items under a must-pass banner.
For a Congress that will go down as the least productive in history, it’s hard to imagine anyone criticizing the House and the Senate for trying to do too much. But this legislation, known fittingly as an “omnibus” bill for its attempts to accomplish everything, is demonstrating what happens when very little gets accomplished all year, and then lawmakers realize time is running out.For a Congress that will go down as the least productive in history, it’s hard to imagine anyone criticizing the House and the Senate for trying to do too much. But this legislation, known fittingly as an “omnibus” bill for its attempts to accomplish everything, is demonstrating what happens when very little gets accomplished all year, and then lawmakers realize time is running out.
Officially, the omnibus plan cobbles together almost all of the annual bills that fund federal agencies because — after political considerations and policy differences delayed their earlier passage — Congress must approve a new spending outline by Friday or else the government will shut down. Officially, the $1.1 trillion omnibus plan cobbles together almost all of the annual bills that fund federal agencies because political considerations and policy differences delayed their earlier passage. With the Senate’s vote late Saturday, Congress sent the massive spending outline to the White House and averted a government shutdown.
The “power of the purse,” as it’s known under the Capitol dome, has always given lawmakers a chance to wade into almost any policy debate with the slight flick of a pen — now a computer keyboard — to increase, reduce or restrict funding for a government program that otherwise would not win a clear majority under the usual rules. This legislation is ripe with many examples, such as language forbidding the Environmental Protection Agency from using money to issue new regulations for farm ponds. The “power of the purse,” as it’s reverentially known under the Capitol dome, has always given lawmakers a chance to wade into almost any policy debate with the slight flick of a pen — now a computer keyboard — to increase, reduce or restrict funding for a government program that otherwise would not win a clear majority under the usual rules. This legislation is ripe with many examples, such as language forbidding the Environmental Protection Agency from using money to issue new regulations for farm ponds.
The bigger, more surprising inclusions in the package are policy riders that are new measures or changes to existing laws. Some have been thoroughly debated in committees and others have barely been considered. The bigger, more surprising inclusions in the package were policy riders that are new measures or changes to existing laws. Some have been thoroughly debated in committees, and others have barely been considered.
For more than a year, Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) have championed the creation of manufacturing hubs nationwide linked to local industry and colleges. The bill drew many bipartisan sponsors but was cast aside by Senate leaders who dedicated their time almost entirely to partisan bills designed to position their candidates for the November elections.For more than a year, Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) have championed the creation of manufacturing hubs nationwide linked to local industry and colleges. The bill drew many bipartisan sponsors but was cast aside by Senate leaders who dedicated their time almost entirely to partisan bills designed to position their candidates for the November elections.
The measure is now tucked into the omnibus package.The measure is now tucked into the omnibus package.
Liberals are particularly upset by the process that led to the inclusion of a revision to the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that regulates large banks, relaxing constraints on how Wall Street firms engage in risky trades. It had been approved in the House Financial Services Committee on a wide bipartisan vote, then approved on the House floor with modest Democratic support, and it was attached to a spending bill in the House Appropriations Committee.Liberals are particularly upset by the process that led to the inclusion of a revision to the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that regulates large banks, relaxing constraints on how Wall Street firms engage in risky trades. It had been approved in the House Financial Services Committee on a wide bipartisan vote, then approved on the House floor with modest Democratic support, and it was attached to a spending bill in the House Appropriations Committee.
That gave Senate Democrats, who will head into the minority after November’s midterm elections, little leverage in negotiations. According to several Democratic sources, they fended off several other policy riders that would have struck at the Dodd-Frank law but gave in on this provision when Republicans offered to increase funding for the regulatory enforcement divisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission. That gave Senate Democrats, who will head into the minority in January, little leverage in negotiations. According to several sources, Democrats fended off a handful of other policy riders that would have struck at the Dodd-Frank law but gave in on this provision when Republicans offered to increase funding for the regulatory enforcement divisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.
“The Senate Democratic leadership realized this is our last few days when we have real leverage, so let’s take advantage of it. Let’s get these bills done,” Moran said Wednesday. The alternative on this Wall Street measure and the other policy riders would be to approve a funding plan to cover several months and then take up the issue again in the late winter when Republicans control both chambers of Congress. “The Senate Democratic leadership realized this is our last few days when we have real leverage, so let’s take advantage of it. Let’s get these bills done,” Moran said.
“I would hope that Democrats would understand that this is the best it’s going to be,” Moran said. Other Democrats viewed agreement to the spending bill as capitulation, especially because the legislation would allow for a new stream of six-figure contributions to the political party committees.
Other Democrats viewed that as capitulation, especially because the legislation would allow for a new stream of six-figure contributions to the political party committees. “Putting these two things in the same bill illustrates everything that’s wrong with the political process right now: a giveaway to the special interests and then providing them the ability to more easily finance the process,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who opposed the measure.
“Putting these two things in the same bill illustrates everything that’s wrong with the political process right now: a giveaway to the special interests and then providing them the ability to more easily finance the process,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who vowed to oppose the measure. Van Hollen was part of the liberal rebellion that nearly brought down the legislation, which narrowly passed the House on Thursday, 219 to 206. The bill moved to the Senate, where a small bloc of conservatives held up its final passage till the weekend in a protest over their inability to get a vote on an amendment to strike out Obama’s implementation of an executive action that halts the deportation of several million illegal immigrants.
Republicans are largely supportive of the proposal, even though it would violate many of the principles — cheaper, smaller, more transparent government — that helped them win control of the House in 2010 and of the Senate in November. It’s a massive bill that almost none of the rank and file will have time to read, large portions of it were written behind closed doors and K Street’s influence can be felt in many places even if there are few actual fingerprints. Otherwise, Republicans were largely supportive of the proposal, even though it would violate many of the principles — particularly a more transparent government — that helped them win control of the House in 2010 and of the Senate in November. It’s a massive bill that almost none of the rank-and-file will have time to read. Large portions of it were written behind closed doors, and K Street’s influence can be felt in many places even if there are few actual fingerprints.
“It’s a terrible way to do business,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the incoming majority whip.“It’s a terrible way to do business,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.), the incoming majority whip.
If the bill passes, the soon-to-be GOP-controlled Congress will start the new year with a mostly clean deck and can begin focusing its fire on issues such as President Obama’s executive action on immigration and portions of his health-care law — all without the specter of a looming government shutdown. When the bill passes the Senate, the soon-to-be GOP-controlled Congress will start the new year with a mostly clean deck and can begin focusing its fire on issues such as Obama’s executive action on immigration and portions of his health-care law — all without the specter of a government shutdown.
Cornyn reiterated the GOP’s pledge to pass a budget framework in the spring and have the 12 funding bills move along at their own pace to avoid the major compilation of “unfinished business crammed into the lame-duck” session.Cornyn reiterated the GOP’s pledge to pass a budget framework in the spring and have the 12 funding bills move along at their own pace to avoid the major compilation of “unfinished business crammed into the lame-duck” session.
Those responsible for drafting this year’s omnibus package are not running from their product.Those responsible for drafting this year’s omnibus package are not running from their product.
“What we’re talking about here is a monumental achievement,” Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a floor speech Wednesday. “It is a monumental achievement for showing how we can work together, we can govern and we can get the job done.” “What we’re talking about here is a monumental achievement,” Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a floor speech that unveiled the bill Wednesday. “It is a monumental achievement for showing how we can work together, we can govern and we can get the job done.”
Rep. Harold Rogers (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, suggested that most spending bills had been aired in committee hearings or received floor consideration, suggesting that the most surprising riders were added by the bipartisan collection of leaders above their pay grade. Rep. Harold Rogers (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said that much of the ire should not be directed at him or Mikulski. Most spending bills had been aired in committee hearings or received floor consideration, suggesting that the most surprising riders were added by the bipartisan collection of leaders above their pay grade.
“Those were leadership decisions. We finalized our bill, the spending bill, and then leadership decided that they wanted to do these other items,” he said.“Those were leadership decisions. We finalized our bill, the spending bill, and then leadership decided that they wanted to do these other items,” he said.
Those boasts from Mikulski and Rogers prove that this legislation is not an orphan, but disproving the old proverb, it will not have 1,000 fathers even though its success is increasingly likely. Those boasts from Mikulski and Rogers prove that this legislation is not an orphan. But disproving the old proverb, it will not have 1,000 fathers even though its success is likely.
“It’s ugly but I think it’s gonna happen,” Cornyn said. “It’s ugly, but I think it’s going to happen,” Cornyn said.