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/house-republicans-try-to-rally-caucus-to-pass-fiscal-outline/2015/03/17/9860b89c-cc9f-11e4-a2a7-9517a3a70506_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
House Republicans try to rally caucus to pass fiscal outline House Republicans try to rally caucus to pass fiscal outline
(about 3 hours later)
House Republicans began the final push Tuesday morning to try to forge enough unity to win passage of their new fiscal outline, unveiling a budget that recoups more than $5 trillion in savings and comes to balance by 2024 through a series of austerity measures. House Republicans released a budget proposal Tuesday that would balance the budget in a decade by revamping Medicare and Medicaid, repealing the Affordable Care Act and making cuts in domestic programs.
The document includes its usual mix of plans to eliminate President Obama’s signature health-care law and streamline entitlement programs, leading to charges from Democrats that they would cut Medicare, but the biggest crunch is likely to come in divisions among defense hawks who want to increase Pentagon spending as overseas threats have not subsided amid the rise of Islamic State forces and other terrorist groups. The plan, which cuts more than $5 trillion from the federal budget, will instantly renew the long-running hostilities with the White House and Democrats regarding spending and debt, but the biggest clash is likely to be between GOP budget hawks determined to reduce spending and defense hawks who want to bolster the Pentagon in the face rising threats from the Islamic State and other terrorist groups.
The proposal does not have the force of law, but with the Senate now in Republican control, it takes on far more importance. With GOP senators set to unveil their doctrine later this week, the budget process offers congressional Republicans a real opportunity to grab control of the annual spending process for federal agency budgets and possibly gives them a path to winning simple majority victories on policy proposals that would otherwise require super-majorities in the Senate. While budget resolutions do not have the force of law, these proposals have greater significance now because Republicans control both chambers of Congress. The budget season allows the two parties to lay out their competing visions, framing a likely fiscal showdown this fall that could resemble those of the previous four years between President Obama and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
If Republicans fail to pass a budget resolution in each chamber, it will be an ignominious defeat for House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who have made steady governance with a conservative tilt their main political goal of the year. Without a budget resolution, the funding process would be particularly unsteady throughout the summer and increase the possibility of at least a small-scale shutdown of parts of the federal government in October. With the GOP now running the Senate, the budget process also gives Republicans a potentially stronger hand in the annual spending process for federal agencies and gives them a path to passing some policy proposals that would otherwise require super-majorities in the Senate.
If Republicans fail to approve a compromise budget that passes both the House and Senate — a real possibility, given their deep divisions on fiscal policy — it will be an ignominious defeat for House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Those two leaders have made steady governance with a conservative tilt their main political goal of the year, and without a budget resolution, the funding process would be particularly unsteady and increase the possibility of at least a small-scale shutdown of parts of the federal government in October.
[Milbank: Obama holds high ground in budget fight with Republicans][Milbank: Obama holds high ground in budget fight with Republicans]
Most Republicans seemed inclined to support the measure, drafted by the new chairman, Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.), who hails from the conservative wing of the GOP caucus. Most Republicans seemed inclined to support the measure, drafted by the new House Budget Committee chairman Tom Price (R-Ga.), who hails from the conservative wing of the GOP caucus and proclaimed it would “provide a contrast” to Obama’s own budget proposal submitted last month. Price gave a guardedly optimistic assessment of the plan’s chances at winning approval in the House.
“This is actually a much more realistic document, makes much tougher decisions, so it’s a superior instrument,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a senior member of the House Budget Committee, told reporters Monday evening. “I think so, sure, absolutely,” Price told reporters after a Capitol news conference unveiling the plan.
Like many veteran lawmakers, Cole predicted that there would likely have to be a bipartisan budget negotiation with Obama — whose veto pen will prove powerful against many Republican proposals — in the fall that is similar to the Ryan-Murray deal that set the budget framework of the past two fiscal years. Price and many veteran lawmakers are expecting bipartisan negotiations with Obama — whose veto pen will prove powerful against most Republican proposals — in the fall, possibly leading to a repeat of the Ryan-Murray 2013 deal that set the budget framework of the past two fiscal years.
“I would look on our budget as our opening position in the negotiation,” he said. “I would look on our budget as our opening position in the negotiation,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a senior member of the House Budget Committee, told reporters Monday evening.
First the Republicans have to get there and pass the budget, with the House and Senate budget panels expected to pass their outlines later this week and have them on the floor for debate next week. Under the 1974 budget act, the final budget is supposed to be passed by both chambers by April 15.First the Republicans have to get there and pass the budget, with the House and Senate budget panels expected to pass their outlines later this week and have them on the floor for debate next week. Under the 1974 budget act, the final budget is supposed to be passed by both chambers by April 15.
The House Republican plan would spend almost $3.8 trillion in 2016, $136 billion less than the current budget envisions. Spending under the GOP plan would rise to more than $4 trillion by fiscal year 2019. It projects revenue of just under $3.5 trillion for the coming fiscal year. They can expect no Democratic support in the process.
“What we’re seeing right now, is a failure to invest in education, infrastructure, research and national defense. All the things that we need to grow, need to create jobs, stay at the forefront of innovation and to keep our country safe,” Obama told reporters at the White House.
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) derided the plan as “unrealistic and ill-conceived and using gimmicks.” Hoyer cited an asterisk in the plan that listed unspecified cuts of about $1.1 trillion to mandatory spending programs, such as welfare and food stamps, without any explanation for how those programs would be cut.
That means Boehner’s leadership team — which has repeatedly struggled to corral votes from recalcitrant conservatives regularly searching for a more pure ideological position — can only afford to lose fewer than 30 votes from the 245 Republicans.
Overall, the plan would spend almost $3.8 trillion in 2016, $136 billion less than the current budget envisions. Spending under the GOP plan would rise to more than $4 trillion by fiscal year 2019. It projects revenue of just under $3.5 trillion for the coming fiscal year.
Republicans say their plan would balance the federal budget and create a surplus by 2024. By contrast, they say, Obama’s proposed budget would generate more than $700 billion in annual deficits by that year. The GOP budget would save over $5 trillion over the next 10 years.Republicans say their plan would balance the federal budget and create a surplus by 2024. By contrast, they say, Obama’s proposed budget would generate more than $700 billion in annual deficits by that year. The GOP budget would save over $5 trillion over the next 10 years.
“Investors and businesses make decisions on a forward-looking basis. They know that today’s large debt levels are likely tomorrow’s tax hikes, interest rate increases, and inflation — and they behave accordingly,” the GOP’s proposal says. “It is this debt overhang, and the uncertainty it generates, that can weigh on growth, investment and job creation.”
The House Republican budget takes aim at a number of measures signed by Obama during the first two years of his tenure, including the Affordable Care Act, the Dodd-Frank financial services reform law and the 2009 stimulus bill.The House Republican budget takes aim at a number of measures signed by Obama during the first two years of his tenure, including the Affordable Care Act, the Dodd-Frank financial services reform law and the 2009 stimulus bill.
Like previous Republican budget proposals, the House GOP’s budget would eliminate the Affordable Care Act in its entirety, including Medicaid expansion adopted by 29 states and the District of Columbia. Republicans would replace the ACA with an alternative that would focus on what budget writers called a “patient-centered approach” to health-care reform.Like previous Republican budget proposals, the House GOP’s budget would eliminate the Affordable Care Act in its entirety, including Medicaid expansion adopted by 29 states and the District of Columbia. Republicans would replace the ACA with an alternative that would focus on what budget writers called a “patient-centered approach” to health-care reform.
One element of the plan would merge Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program into a single program. It would create a reserve fund to extend federal spending on SCHIP.One element of the plan would merge Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program into a single program. It would create a reserve fund to extend federal spending on SCHIP.
The GOP plan would replace Medicaid expansion through State Flexibility Funds, which would put Medicaid coverage plans in the hands of state governments. It would leave in place some alternatives to traditional Medicaid expansion plans proposed by Republican governors in states like Indiana, where Gov. Mike Pence (R) won federal support for a program that is similar, but not identical, to expansion envisioned under the ACA.The GOP plan would replace Medicaid expansion through State Flexibility Funds, which would put Medicaid coverage plans in the hands of state governments. It would leave in place some alternatives to traditional Medicaid expansion plans proposed by Republican governors in states like Indiana, where Gov. Mike Pence (R) won federal support for a program that is similar, but not identical, to expansion envisioned under the ACA.
The budget repeals several parts of the Dodd-Frank legislation, including an end to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s authority to bail out creditors of institutions deemed too big to fail. It would require Congress to appropriate funding for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, which currently generates its revenue from the Federal Reserve. And it would privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the semi-public lending institutions.The budget repeals several parts of the Dodd-Frank legislation, including an end to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s authority to bail out creditors of institutions deemed too big to fail. It would require Congress to appropriate funding for the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, which currently generates its revenue from the Federal Reserve. And it would privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the semi-public lending institutions.
The budget also curtails some programs implemented through the 2009 stimulus bill, which spent about $800 billion trying to drag the United States out of an economic recession. The bill proposes limiting Energy Department programs that have invested in emerging technologies by requiring the department leave application and commercialization of those technologies to the private sector. It also rescinds money that hasn’t yet been spent on green energy programs. Price told reporters Tuesday that, if the House and Senate can reach compromise on a single budget, it would offer the chambers a chance to use special budgetary fast-track rules to pass policy plans, such as repeal of the ACA, without having to clear a Senate filibuster.
Republicans said their bill would simplify the tax code through comprehensive reform, repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax and lowering rates for both individuals and corporations. It would create a reserve fund to spur a new surface transportation bill that would keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent. Republicans would also be able to simplify the tax code through a massive legislative lift that would lower rates for both individuals and corporations. It would create a reserve fund to spur a new surface transportation bill that would keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent.
Without any bipartisan agreement by the fall, federal spending outlines will return to the caps set by the 2011 Budget Control Act, which culminated a months-long showdown between Boehner’s then-newly empowered House GOP majority and Obama. It is designed to achieve $2.1 trillion in savings over a decade and sets limits on the amount of defense and domestic agency spending in that framework.Without any bipartisan agreement by the fall, federal spending outlines will return to the caps set by the 2011 Budget Control Act, which culminated a months-long showdown between Boehner’s then-newly empowered House GOP majority and Obama. It is designed to achieve $2.1 trillion in savings over a decade and sets limits on the amount of defense and domestic agency spending in that framework.
Without any action by Congress and the president, Pentagon spending will be limited to $523 billion in 2016, a flat rate of spending at a time of increased threats at home and abroad. The Pentagon spending would be limited to $523 billion in 2016, a flat rate of spending at a time of increased threats at home and abroad. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and his House counterpart, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.), are leading a bipartisan effort to increase the Pentagon spending plan to more than $570 billion.
“We cannot afford to defer this vital debate. All of our senior military leaders have testified to Congress this year that if defense spending remains at sequestration levels, they cannot implement the National Military Strategy, and it will put Americans’ lives at risk,” Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said Monday. Price’s document, unveiled Tuesday, does more than that, technically raising spending to more than $600 billion, but it does so by fiddling with funds for the overseas war effort in the Middle East. That account is considered off the books for annual accounting, and McCain called the proposal “not legitimate”.
He and his House counterpart, Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.), are leading a bipartisan effort to increase the Pentagon spending plan to more than $570 billion. He plans to mount an effort during the Senate debate to increase the regular Pentagon accounts, but acknowledged Tuesday that anything is better than the alternative of leaving the effects of current budget caps, known as sequestration, in effect.
Price’s document, unveiled Tuesday, does more than that, technically raising spending to more than $600 billion, but it does so by fiddling with funds for the overseas war effort in the Middle East. That account is considered off the books for annual accounting, and many have derided it as a gimmick. “I’d rather do my proposal, okay? But I am willing to do most anything to prevent the effects of sequestration from taking place, which is putting the lives of american service men and woman at risk, according to our military uniformed leaders,” McCain said.
The Price plan would spend more than Obama proposed spending on the Department of Defense, mandated by current caps set in the Budget Control Act. The GOP would spend a total of $387 billion more on defense over the next 10 years.
If the GOP’s military hawks revolt against the budget, it has no hope of passing. Democrats are not expected to lend any support for a document they consider overly harsh.If the GOP’s military hawks revolt against the budget, it has no hope of passing. Democrats are not expected to lend any support for a document they consider overly harsh.
Mike DeBonis contributed to this report. Mike DeBonis and Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report.