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/republicans-heading-for-whiplash-on-partisan-budget-bipartisan-health-bill/2015/03/22/32aef3a4-d0c5-11e4-8fce-3941fc548f1c_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

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

Version 0 Version 1
Republicans heading for whiplash on partisan budget, bipartisan health bill Republicans heading for whiplash on partisan budget, bipartisan health bill
(about 11 hours later)
Congressional Republicans are heading into a whiplash-inducing week with key votes on deck for the fiscal outline for 2016 and a plan to revamp the payment system for doctors who treat Medicare patients. Congressional Republicans will have their governing bona fides tested again this week with key votes on the 2016 budget and a plan to revamp the payment system for doctors who treat Medicare patients.
On the budget resolution, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) will be in familiar territory, trying to pass an austere spending plan with votes entirely from his side of the aisle but facing a revolt from the far-right flank, which demands more ideological purity. With the Medicare provision, Boehner worked preemptively with Democrats and has crafted a proposal that has not provoked much division among his ranks and could create some of the structural changes to entitlement programs his party has long sought. On the budget resolution, House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) will be in familiar territory, trying to pass an austere spending plan with votes entirely from his side of the aisle but facing a revolt from the far-right flank, which insists on more ideological purity in budgeting (and nearly everything else).
In an almost improbable fashion, given the unsteadiness of the opening months of this year, Boehner has the chance to end the first quarter on a surprisingly upbeat note that could expose divisions among Democrats. But first Republicans must dodge several obstacles, and even if they do, the speaker doesn’t necessarily think he has found a new paradigm for getting things done. For the Medicare provision, Boehner worked preemptively with Democrats. The proposal, which has not provoked much division within his party’s ranks, could create some of the structural changes to entitlement programs that Republicans have long sought.
“There was an opportunity that presented itself to work in a bipartisan way to find the appropriate offsets, spending offsets. And the door opened, and I decided to walk in it. As simple as that,” Boehner told reporters at the end of last week. In almost improbable fashion, given the unsteadiness of the first months of this year, Boehner has a chance to end the first quarter on an upbeat note that could expose divisions among Democrats. But first, Republicans will have to dodge several obstacles, and even if they do, the speaker doesn’t necessarily think he has found a new paradigm for success.
Epitomizing the strange times ahead was an impassioned discussion Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) held with reporters just off the House floor. On the budget, Mulvaney, a staunch conservative, was outraged that leaders were willing to tack on nearly $100 billion in additional war funding that would go into a special account and technically would not count toward balancing the budget. “We’re breaking the law, not the letter, but the spirit,” he said. “There was an opportunity that presented itself to work in a bipartisan way to find the appropriate offsets, spending offsets,” Boehner told reporters, explaining his decision to engage the Democrats on the Medicare plan. “And the door opened, and I decided to walk in it. As simple as that.”
On the Medicare proposal, Mulvaney said he did not mind that the $210 billion health bill would have only $70 billion in offsetting cuts because he thinks the reforms would lead to much greater savings beyond the traditional 10-year method for estimating costs. “You should be willing to look outside the [10-year] window,” he said. But there is little question that stranger times await. Take, for example, the impassioned discussion that Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) held with reporters just off the House floor. On the budget, Mulvaney, a staunch conservative, was outraged that leaders were willing to tack on nearly $100 billion in additional war funding that would go into a special account and technically would not count toward balancing the budget. “We’re breaking the law — not the letter but the spirit,” he said.
Much of the focus will be on the budget fight, mostly because it frames the rest of the year for House and Senate Republicans in their effort to use the funding process to rein in federal regulations, and because not passing a budget would make it impossible to advance a repeal of the health-care law to President Obama for a likely veto. On the Medicare proposal, Mulvaney said he did not mind that the $210 billion health bill would have only $70 billion in offsetting cuts because he thinks the reforms would lead to much greater savings beyond the traditional 10-year time frame for estimating costs. “You should be willing to look outside the [10-year] window,” he said.
But the Medicare legislation, known by insiders as the “doc fix,” could represent a legitimate early bipartisan victory for a Congress desperately in need of some good news. Much of the focus this week will be on the budget fight, mostly because it frames the rest of the year for House and Senate Republicans in their effort to use the funding process to rein in federal regulations. Also, not passing a budget would make it impossible to advance a repeal of the health-care law to President Obama for a likely veto.
It was negotiated by the Republican chairman and Democratic ranking members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, who presented a summary of the proposal Friday evening. It would permanently fix a funding formula for payments to physicians who treat Medicare patients, replacing a system that was crafted in the 1990s and was regularly “fixed” because Congress did not want to impose cuts to doctors with elderly patients. But the Medicare legislation, known as the “doc fix,” could represent an early bipartisan victory for a Congress desperately in need of some good news.
The proposal has something for everyone to like — and to dislike. “We have an important opportunity to do away with the flawed [payment system] once and for all and create more stability for seniors and doctors by putting Medicare and the way we pay physicians within the program on a firmer footing,” said Rep. Sander M. Levin (Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means panel. It was negotiated by the Republican chairmen and the ranking Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee, who presented a summary of the proposal Friday evening. It would permanently change a funding formula for payments to physicians who treat Medicare patients, replacing a system that was created in the 1990s but was regularly “fixed” because Congress did not want to cut payments to doctors with elderly patients.
The plan, which has the support of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), would fix the nettlesome pricing plan and would provide a two-year extension of a children’s health program operated by the states while extending funding for community health centers for two years. Those two programs are funded at levels in accordance with the Affordable Care Act. The proposal has something for everyone to like — and dislike. “We have an important opportunity to do away with the flawed [payment system] once and for all and create more stability for seniors and doctors by putting Medicare and the way we pay physicians within the program on a firmer footing,” said Rep. Sander M. Levin (Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means panel.
With Boehner’s backing, the plan would set up a “means testing” plan that would require the wealthiest seniors to pay more for Medicare, a long-sought goal of Republicans who think it would lead to big savings in the decades to come. In addition to fixing the nettlesome pricing formula, the plan, which has the support of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), would provide a two-year extension of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, operated by the states, and extend funding for community health centers for two years. Those programs would be funded at levels in accordance with the Affordable Care Act.
The plan has drawn concerns from the AARP and other seniors’ groups that are afraid of the precedent it could set for means testing. Abortion rights groups have taken the unusual stand of critiquing Pelosi for going along with a deal that would include restrictions on federal funding for abortion. With Boehner’s backing, the proposal would set up a “means testing” plan that would require the wealthiest seniors to pay more for Medicare, a long-sought goal of Republicans who think it would lead to big savings in the decades to come.
On Saturday, a group of Senate Democrats issued a list of concerns about the legislation, primarily their demand for a four-year extension of the states’ Children’s Health Insurance Program. Their reluctance to sign on might require a short-term fix to the Medicare payment system so that the Senate can fully consider the larger proposal. The plan has drawn concern from the AARP and other seniors’ groups, which fear that it could set a precedent for means testing. And abortion rights groups have taken the unusual step of critiquing Pelosi for going along with a deal that would include restrictions on federal funding for the procedure.
Conservative groups advocating fiscal restraint, led by the Club for Growth, are warning lawmakers not to support a bill that does not include “real spending cuts.” On Saturday, a group of Senate Democrats issued a list of concerns about the legislation, foremost their demand for a four-year extension of the Children’s Health Insurance Program. Their reluctance to sign on might require a short-term fix to the Medicare payment system so the Senate can fully consider the larger proposal.
Despite the left-right opposition among outside groups, senior aides expressed confidence Sunday that the proposal was still on track for passage by the middle of the week. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, supports the measure, and on past fiscal matters his support generally has meant that up to two-thirds of House Republicans could back the legislation. Meanwhile, conservative groups advocating fiscal restraint, led by the Club for Growth, are warning lawmakers not to support a bill that does not include “real spending cuts.”
Pelosi holds a similar stature in her caucus. “Sometimes our differences are regional, sometimes they’re philosophical, sometimes they’re generational,” she told reporters late last week. “I call it the giant kaleidoscope. So you never know when you turn that dial who’s going to be part of the formula for passing a bill.” Despite the opposition from outside groups on both sides, senior congressional aides expressed confidence Sunday that the proposal was on track for passage by the middle of the week. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, backs the measure, and on past fiscal matters his support generally has meant that up to two-thirds of House Republicans could back the legislation.
That kaleidoscope will become bright red on the budget, which the Senate will take up Monday evening. The House version is likely to come up after the Medicare proposal. Pelosi holds similar sway in her caucus. “Sometimes our differences are regional, sometimes they’re philosophical, sometimes they’re generational,” she told reporters late last week. “I call it the giant kaleidoscope. So you never know when you turn that dial who’s going to be part of the formula for passing a bill.”
Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have worked to tamp down a rebellion by military hawks who are upset that the 2011 Budget Control Act has set a limit deemed insufficient for Pentagon needs. On the budget, Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) have worked to tamp down a rebellion by military hawks who are upset that the 2011 Budget Control Act has set a spending limit deemed insufficient for Pentagon needs.
“I already got snake-bit by this once,” Rep. Thomas J. Rooney (R-Fla.), a member of the intelligence committee, said in an interview. Rooney said he regrets his 2011 vote for the BCA because it exposed the military to spending limits. “I already got snake-bit by this once,” Rep. Thomas J. Rooney (R-Fla.), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said in an interview. Rooney said he regrets his vote for the 2011 law because it has exposed the military to budget limits.
To ameliorate those concerns, almost $100 billion has been added to an off-budget account designed to pay for wars in the Middle East, a maneuver that averts the spending limits on defense issues. But conservatives such as Mulvaney think the new funds should have their own offsets so that the budget is truly balanced over a decade. To ameliorate those concerns, almost $100 billion has been added to an off-budget account designed to pay for wars in the Middle East, a maneuver that averts the defense spending caps. But conservatives such as Mulvaney think the new funding should have its own offsets so that the budget is truly balanced over a decade.
A budget resolution needs just a simple majority to pass, and no Democrat is expected to vote for the GOP plans because of their cuts to popular entitlement programs. A budget resolution needs a simple majority to pass. No Democrat is expected to vote for the GOP’s plan because of its cuts to popular entitlement programs.
The drama could, once again, fall in the House, where Boehner will not be opening any doors for Pelosi and Democrats to bail him out of trouble. The drama could, once again, fall in the House, where Boehner will not be opening any doors for Pelosi and the Democrats to bail him out.