The Senate Reaches A Two Year Budget Deal. Can They Jam The House?

The Senate has reached a two year budget deal. It includes:

The deal would raise the spending caps by about $300 billion over two years, according to a congressional aide. The limit on military and other defense spending would be increased by $80 billion in the current fiscal year and $85 billion in the next year, which begins Oct. 1, the aide said. The limit on nondefense spending would increase by $63 billion this year and $68 billion next year.

The deal also includes increased funding for dealing with the opioid crisis, disaster relief, extends CHIP coverage out another four years in addition to the six year funding in the last CR for a total of ten years of funding, and a debt limit increase. It is also includes two years of funding for community health centers, as well as funding for child care. If this passes the House and is signed into law, the Congressional appropriators will have six weeks to appropriate against this years increased funding caps.* The deal does not include a DACA fix. This will, provided the government actually stays open past late Thursday night/early Friday morning, be dealt with under a separate process beginning in the Senate next week.

The Senate appears to be trying to jam the House with this. As in: we passed this, now it is up to you. The Senate didn’t even consider bringing up the narrow deal that the House had passed yesterday. As a result, the House side is where this is going to be much harder to pass. Speaker Ryan will have a difficult time holding his caucus together to pass the Senate bill. The Freedom Caucus members will all vote no. A significant chunk of the Republican Study Group members are likely to vote no as well. And they’ll do so under the war cry of exploding budget deficits, seemingly unaware of the $1.5 trillion increase in the deficit that is the result of the GOP only, partisan tax cut bill passed in December 2017. This means that Speaker Ryan either has to abandon the Hastert Rule and ask Congresswoman Pelosi for the votes to pass this or he maintains obeisance to the Hastert Rule and refuses to bring this to a vote. If it is the former, this gives Congresswoman Pelosi leverage to extract a promise to bring up a clean bill to resolve the problem created when the President rescinded the DACA executive order; similar to what Senator Schumer negotiated in the Senate. If it is the latter, then the government will likely shutdown tomorrow night.

All the action, stress, and flop sweat will now be in the House of Representative. At this point the President is largely irrelevant until such time as he either has to sign or veto a budget bill. Whether we reach that point is now all on Speaker Ryan. Senators McConnell and Schumer have left him holding the hand grenade and they’ve handed Congresswoman Pelosi the pin.

Stay frosty!

Open thread.

* Just a quick note: the DOD, the Services, and their subordinate commands, offices, departments, and bureaus function under what is known as the 80/20 Rule. This means that 80% of their annual budgets must be spent before the end of the 3rd quarter of the fiscal year. Even if this passes and the appropriators work as efficiently as possible, it is going to be very hard for the DOD and the Services to comply with the 80/20 Rule. And that is going to make for a very uncomfortable spring, summer, and fall for the US military.

127 replies
  1. 1
    aimai says:

    This senate/house two step is insane, with the hastert rule and general top incompetence and horribleness. Its hard to imagine anything ever getting through. My hat is off to Nancy and Chuck, I don’t think they can do anything other than they are doing.

  2. 2
    Another Scott says:

    re your last – DoD officials announce first DoD-wide audit (from December).

    It’s really hard to spend money efficiently, and follow all the rules, when the budget is unknown, money arrives later than it should, etc., etc.

    The next couple of days may be very interesting…

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  3. 3
    Corner Stone says:

    If this passes the House and is signed into law

    As you mention further in your commentary, I do not believe Ryan can get the votes on his (R) own. So I doubt this will ever see the House floor.

  4. 4
    Three-nineteen says:

    Slate is reporting that Pelosi agreed to the deal because Ryan committed to protect Dreamers (I’ll believe that when I see it):

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/02/senate-leaders-budget-deal-government-shutdown.html

  5. 5
    Corner Stone says:

    it is going to be very hard for the DOD and the Services to comply with the 80/20 Rule. And that is going to make for a very uncomfortable spring, summer, and fall for the US military.

    I’m not sure I understand why it will be uncomfortable in the spring? Because they will still have money to be spent and allocated but not yet to where it needs to be? Can this be fleshed out a little in a sentence or two?

    edited a bit

  6. 6
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @aimai: A lot of this is like applied, pairs combat tai chi or aikido. Suck one’s adversary is and then use as much of their own power against them as possible.

  7. 7
    cain says:

    @Three-nineteen:

    This is moronic. They have the upperhand, Ryan needs the vote. The protecting the dreamers need to be in the funding bill. If Trump vetos it, then it is on them. And you know that anything related to DACA will be vetoed by Trump unless you can convince him it will make him popular, but our friend Stephen Miller will ensure that he is the last person the President talks to before making a decision.

  8. 8
    Corner Stone says:

    The deal does not include a DACA fix.

    Relying on unreliable people to at some unknown date bring a “clean” DACA fix forward is going to make quite a few people unhappy.

  9. 9
    guachi says:

    I’m up for voting “no” on this bill. Rising deficits at a time we don’t need rising deficits. No thanks.

  10. 10
    Immanentize says:

    @Adam L Silverman: it sounds like a pretty good deal. Especially if the Dems take back the House next year. Extra money for domestic programming is not something I expected, but the sequestration law once again worked it’s magic on getting the sides to agree.

    As for the Dreamers ….

  11. 11
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Another Scott: It is. I consulted on a project for a senior leader about the effect of the Federal budget uncertainty on the DOD and the Services back in December and January. It was a very depressing research project. The DOD and the Services aren’t perfect. And even when there is a regular order for budgets and appropriations, some money is going to spent in ways that often seem weird, at best. But CR to CR is just a nightmare.

  12. 12
    MisterForkbeard says:

    @Corner Stone: Apparently the Dacafix stuff happens… next week, not at some completely nebulous “unknown date”.

  13. 13
    Corner Stone says:

    We now also potentially have a 10 year window of CHIP funding. Which makes me wonder how hollow a “victory” was achieved during the last shutdown negotiations.

  14. 14
    Corner Stone says:

    @MisterForkbeard: Believes it when I sees it.

  15. 15

    @Three-nineteen:
    It seems weird to me that Nancy believes he would do this, but she’s a consummate politician who has been rolling Republicans like chumps as long as I can remember. She knows something. I wish I knew what.

  16. 16
    aimai says:

    @Corner Stone: You just don’t know what you are talking about. No on his “relying’ on anything that you guys see, or don’t see, from the outside. nancy Pelosi is a much harder bargainer than Barack Obama was and tries to make sure that nothing is left on the table. IF she takes a deal its because its the best deal she thinks she can get that will help the most people. I can’t stand this enteral monday morning quarterbacking. Nancy Pelosi is the real deal and always has been. She is nobody’s sucker.

  17. 17
    TenguPhule says:

    Speaker Ryan will have a difficult time holding his caucus together to pass the Senate bill. The Freedom Caucus members will all vote no. A significant chunk of the Republican Study Group members are likely to vote no as well.

    Relying on the whims of the Teabaggers isn’t very comforting.

    If they do hold their noses and pass this shit, we’re in trouble.

    Pray that short term tactics will override their long term strategic thinking.

  18. 18
    Immanentize says:

    @Adam L Silverman: also, getting a huge budget in Q2 which must mostly be spent by end of Q3 (end of June) is the best recipe for fraud and waste. If you have anything to sell, get a contract now! We should tell Satby to start working on Base PX contracts.

  19. 19
    comrade scotts agenda of rage says:

    The NYT article reports that Nancy Smash is against the bill so I’m not sure why she would then provide Ryan with enough Dem votes to pass it. Unless there’s some Dem caucus rule in which she allows Dem members to vote however they want.

  20. 20
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Corner Stone: They’re going to have about 30 to 45 days to spend 80% of their budget. That’s why it is going to be uncomfortable.

  21. 21
    Immanentize says:

    @aimai: co-sign.

  22. 22
    Corner Stone says:

    @aimai: Sure thing.

  23. 23
    Miss Bianca says:

    @aimai: Hear, hear.

  24. 24
    JMG says:

    Why on earth did the 80/20 rule come into existence? What if a war starts in the third quarter, like when Saddam invaded Kuwait?

  25. 25
    Mart says:

    I am just a dirty old hippie wanna be (a couple years too young – never had to register for the draft); but good FSM almighty will Dems ever be allowed to talk about reining in the ridiculous defense budget? Stop making Charlie Pierce’s “flying Swiss knife”, not blowing shit up in seven or so countries, etc. Spending $400 million to audit their expenses shows just what a fucking joke/boondoggle the defense appropriations have become. Makes you wonder if the other 80/20 rule applies, Twenty percent of the appropriations account for 80% of the waste.

  26. 26
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Immanentize: As I wrote yesterday, it doesn’t matter what the Democrats do at this point, my professional estimate is that there will be no DACA fix. Whatever passes the Senate won’t pass the House, unless Ryan waives the Hastert Rule. If he does and just a DACA fix with some border security funding is passed, basically a skinny DACA/border security bill, the President will veto it. The issue here is not the Democrats. The issue is that significant number of Republican senators and representatives, the President, his senior advisors pertaining to this issue (Miller, Kelly), and the base, which has been propagandized on this for several decades, do not want to fix this. What they want is harsh treatment of every undocumented immigrant and a significant rewrite of immigration law to severely restrict immigration into the US. Basically Fortress America where we close the doors, lock them, and lock up the keys. Unless or until the Democrats retake the majority in both chambers of Congress and are able to build a veto proof coalition of votes with those Republicans willing to make reasonable fixes and adjustments, similar to what was proposed under both the Bush 43 and Obama Administrations, this will not be fixed. I don’t mean to sound cruel, and I wish it was otherwise, but the Democrats do not have the terrain, nor the numbers, nor the ability to concentrate the Republicans in such a way as to win this fight. All they can do right now is block, largely in the Senate, a repeal of the immigration laws passed in the 1960s and return to the immigration laws of the 1920s.

  27. 27
    Bobby Thomson says:

    Wasn’t one of the terms of the last deal that we were going to have a DACA vote before now? And McConnell already having reneged on that promise, why is a term of the new deal that this time he really isn’t going to pull the football away I swear you guys?

    The internal polling must be horrible. This country is fucking racist and sucks.

  28. 28
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Immanentize: I’ll be happy to help write the proposals for a cut of the profits.

  29. 29
    trollhattan says:

    @Mart:
    Never nearly enough pushback on the Republican lie (from virtually everybody with (R) after his/her name) that Obama strangled the military for eight awful years. Obama raised the DoD budget yearly. Full stop.

  30. 30
    efgoldman says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    They’re going to have about 30 to 45 days to spend 80% of their budget. That’s why it is going to be uncomfortable.

    Ah, but the Easter egg is: This is where the [mythical] parade [mythical] money will come from.

  31. 31
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @comrade scotts agenda of rage: She can free them from the whip, as the technical terminology goes. What she is trying to do is leverage her caucus’s votes to get a clean DACA fix bill next week.

  32. 32
    cain says:

    @aimai:
    Fair enough. Although I still think whatever deals are made still has go through Miller.

  33. 33
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @Adam L Silverman: oh, I agree Republicans don’t want DACA unless they can get a lot for it and that it won’t happen in this Congress. That’s not an argument for not trying. How many times did Republicans try to repeal Obamacare?

  34. 34
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @JMG: Then you pass an emergency supplemental. Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding, which is basically the separate budget for active and ongoing combat operations, is a separate appropriations issue.

  35. 35
    trollhattan says:

    @aimai:
    I {heart} Nancy SMASH. I respect Nancy SMASH’s political instincts and mastery of the legislative process. Does anybody in congress have her skillset? I’d love to know who.

  36. 36
    Immanentize says:

    @Adam L Silverman: I agree. We are in a blocking position. The Courts are still helping, some. But the GOP threat to legal immigration is a serious threat to our economy. I do think we will correct, but a lot of innocent people, like the Dreamers, are gonna get hurt. And I suspect the over riding narrative will not be about racist/nativist Republicans but rather how the Democrats abandoned their (non voting) constituents.

  37. 37
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Bobby Thomson: No, the agreement was a DACA fix vote by next week.

  38. 38
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @Adam L Silverman: I don’t mean to sound cruel

    I don’t think it’s cruel, it’s a realistic reading of the facts on the ground. And the fact that so many pro-DACA/Dreamer supporters want to make this a story about Democratic weakness instead of Republican cruelty and hypocrisy (Marco Rubio, Cory Gardner, I don’t know who else on Team McConnell pays lip service to this issue) just plays into the hands of the Steve Kings of the world.

  39. 39
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    O/T but I haven’t been able to get “Why Can’t the English?” out of my head since early this morning.

    I hope you’re happy 😡

  40. 40
  41. 41
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @efgoldman: No, not at all. There is no way they can pull off a parade much before mid to late summer. And the military is pushing for Veterans Day to depoliticize this as it would be the 100 year anniversary and it would push the parade to after the midterms. That would be in the next fiscal year’s appropriation.

  42. 42
    cain says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    I don’t think it’s cruel, it’s a realistic reading of the facts on the ground. And the fact that so many pro-DACA/Dreamer supporters want to make this a story about Democratic weakness instead of Republican cruelty and hypocrisy (Marco Rubio, Cory Gardner, I don’t know who else on Team McConnell pays lip service to this issue) just plays into the hands of the Steve Kings of the world.

    Yes, this is a problem. It’s the whole LGBT marriage equality thing all over again. I wonder if Obama ever got credit for that after all that whinging. In any case, we need to be focused together, it’s just there are just so many divisions of people who want different things and everything is seen as a weakness.

  43. 43
    Immanentize says:

    @Adam L Silverman: How are Veterans gonna feel about such a display?

    ETA I think it would be great to turn this into a “We can send a man to the Moon but…” Moment focussing on homeless Vets and the VA underfunding and suicide and drug addiction. How much is that three hour spectacle going to cost? How many veteran lives could be saved with that money?

  44. 44
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Bobby Thomson: I am not arguing that the Democrats should not try to get it, just that reality needs to set in. All the Democrats have right now is the ability to say no in the Senate. That’s it. And that only gets them so far.

  45. 45
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @trollhattan:

    Another Nancy SMASH! fan here. Even when her statements or decisions seem perplexing to us on the outside, she does know what she’s doing just about all the time. That combination of finely-honed political skills, a bone-deep understanding of the legislative process, and a solid liberal sense of what is right and moral — well, it makes for a pretty formidable leader. I do hope she’s made a point of mentoring younger Democrats over the years.

  46. 46
    Corner Stone says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    instead of Republican cruelty and hypocrisy

    That’s what their voters want from them. No one who votes R wants a clean DACA fix. They might not even take a lopsided and fully larded up DACA “fix” without rebelling loudly. The D’s have a limited amount of leverage but IMO I do not believe getting a “promise” from anyone in R leadership is worth anything. I thought we were already going to have a vote brought forward on DACA after the govt shutdown? I missed it if it came through. ISTR Trump “shitholing” any negotiations a while back.

  47. 47
    Roger Moore says:

    @Adam L Silverman:
    Veterans Day is also likely to have friendlier weather for a parade. I would not relish marching through DC in July.

  48. 48
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    And the military is pushing for Veterans Day to depoliticize this

    Am I the only one who finds the idea of parading military might on Armistice Day missing the point by, like, miles?

  49. 49
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @Adam L Silverman: harumph. I guess I allowed myself to believe a pre-February 8 vote was part of the deal. I hope there at least was a deadline. Not a fan of the “we can negotiate as soon as you throw away all your leverage” tactic.

  50. 50
    Bobby Thomson says:

    @SiubhanDuinne: is it leaving you close to tears?

  51. 51

    @Adam L Silverman: oh right, the government does their September fiscal year thing.

  52. 52
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Immanentize: From the initial reporting I’ve seen it is split. The much more conservative veterans groups will likely reflexively support this. All the others not so much. It would be a tremendous waste of resources. It isn’t like we don’t have military personnel and veterans in every Independence Day and Memorial Day and Veterans Day parade and observance as it is. If this was just a few brigades of Army, regiments of Marines, with Navy and Air Force fly overs it wouldn’t be too disruptive. What the President wants is a complete waste of time and money. And it will not just destroy the infrastructure – roads and bridges – of DC, but it will be destructive of the training and operational cycles of each Service.

  53. 53
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Am I the only one who finds the idea of parading military might on Armistice Day missing the point by, like, miles?

    That was precisely my thought: What a sick and twisted way to commemorate “The War to End All Wars.” Even though it, you know, wasn’t.

  54. 54
    Wayne says:

    Those billions of dollars of increases in spending will come back to haunt Dems when the Rebs say there is not enough money for SS and MC. And really, the tax increase day of reckoning gets closer and closer with more spending and less revenue. Can no one see that there is no way to EVER reduce the debt without a tax increase? That ship sailed with the Bush tax cut, which by the way cost me about 4x what the tax savings were.
    I thought I read McConnell was gong to have immigration to the floor before this next shutdown threat and now I read where he only promised it IF the shutdown was avoided.

  55. 55
    SiubhanDuinne says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    In America, I haven’t spoken it for years!

  56. 56
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Corner Stone: The promise, which McConnell referred to in his remarks today about the budget deal, was that a DACA fix would be brought up by the end of next week. He indicated today that he’s scheduled the time next week for this to be dealt with. This includes time for debate and voting.

  57. 57
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Gin & Tonic: That’s just crazy talk.

  58. 58
    efgoldman says:

    @Adam L Silverman: Probably should have added snarkasm font or tag

  59. 59
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Bobby Thomson: The deal was if a bill isn’t finalized and brought forward by 8 February, then provided the government isn’t shutdown, McConnell would schedule time in the following week for debate and votes on the various different DACA fix proposals currently being worked on by different groups of senators.

  60. 60
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    As I was pointing out yesterday, we already have a military presence at every goddamned parade in this country, including the fucking Rose Parade. Why do we need yet another fucking military parade?

  61. 61
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Mnemosyne: Because the President has very, very low self esteem.

  62. 62
    scuffletuffle says:

    @Roger Moore: can’t we just fake it with toy vehicles and little green men? Cheaper AND better for the environment…

    On second thoughts, Peeps!

  63. 63
    Immanentize says:

    I love this world — what could be more American and foreign affairs-y than the Danish National Symphony Orchestra playing the the music from an Italian movie about the American Civil War (sorta). The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

  64. 64
    trollhattan says:

    @scuffletuffle: Roombas and drones down Pennsylvania Ave. In neat rows. IDK if the Doo Dah Precision Briefcase Drill Team still exists, but they’d be welcome too. Dykes on Bikes from the SF pride parade would be a nice finishing touch.

  65. 65
    Yutsano says:

    The last word I saw about the 2 year budget deal was also a decrease in IRS funding by $123 million. As in: implement a massive tax overhaul then cut the knees off the agency who needs to enact said overhaul. AKA why the withholding tables took forever and a day as it was.

  66. 66
    TenguPhule says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    As I wrote yesterday, it doesn’t matter what the Democrats do at this point, my professional estimate is that there will be no DACA fix.

    We’re going into the 2018 campaign season like this:

    Democrats: Vote for Us, we’re better then the Republicans

    Republicans: Don’t vote for Democrats, they’re no better then we are. At least we’re proud to be evil assholes!

    Third Party: Both sides suck, vote for us instead because we’re pure!

    Working with Republicans is just muddying our own waters.

    We will get no credit for keeping government open and all of the blame for the shit we couldn’t protect.

  67. 67
    TenguPhule says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Why do we need yet another fucking military parade?

    How else can Trump rid himself of all opposition from the other branches of government while making taxpayers pay for it?

  68. 68
    Corner Stone says:

    @scuffletuffle: We could hire those guys that did the model tank in a sandbox to prove something something conclusively! I bet they could put on a full parade for like $50. Throw in a few extra for a Barbie Ivanka ™ and we’ve got ourselves a respectful party!

  69. 69
    jl says:

    I don’t understand how Congressional shenanigans interact with the 80/20 rule. I’m guessing that the military won’t be able to officially spend the money until it gets processed under the new appropriation, so either they can find some kind of IOU work around or have to rip through 80 percent of the money in far less than 3 quarters of elapsed calendar time. Is that right? Any links on the details of that?

  70. 70
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @TenguPhule: There was no way to protect the Dreamers if the Democrats are in the minority in both chambers of Congress and the President is Donald Trump, who is overtly anti-immigrant. That doesn’t mean the Democrats shouldn’t try to do whatever they can, which they are. But reality is a cruel mistress. And the reality is that the GOP controls the Federal government and the executive branch is lead by an overtly anti-immigrant President advised on this issue by overtly anti-immigrant and/or white supremacist senior advisors. You can either hold the people actually responsible for destructive policy responsible or you can do what you’re doing, which appears to be throwing an ongoing freak out and tantrum in the comments section here in response to what are usually very sympathetic and tolerant responses to your comments.

  71. 71
    Tilda Swintons Bald Cap says:

    @Mnemosyne: Doesn’t matter, he’s already won the argument. The MSM has already turned this into a celebration of our hard fighting vets. Now if there are protests, the protesters are liberal anti-military traitorous scum Democrats. As an added bonus if a Democrat wins in 2020 you can guess what will happen if they decide to cancel the parade.

  72. 72
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @jl: It is the time compression. They’ll have to spend it all in a compressed amount of time. This will contribute to waste, fraud, and abuse. The other problem is that the DOD’s and Services’ budget cycles are really four year cycles. A couple of programs/offices are actually 6 year cycles. And the folks that prepare the budgets look at whether you were able to actually spend everything appropriate for you/allocated to you. If you don’t, they usually cut that funding in the next budget preparation. Since you didn’t spend it, or couldn’t hire people with the screwy timelines because you had your searches repeatedly suspended, then you clearly didn’t need the money or the personnel, so we’re just going to reduce that in the next allocation.

  73. 73
    TenguPhule says:

    @Adam L Silverman: I’m freaking out about a 2 year extension, which pretty much is giving away a lot of what little leverage we still have. I get that we can’t protect the Dreamers because we have no majorities, but the fight was never about winning, but actually fighting in the first place. I shouldn’t have to tell you that the optics on this are fucking terrible.

    Everyone keeps saying we have to convince the persuadable voters that our party is better then the Republicans, well this isn’t it. Cooperating with the Republicans never ends well for us.

  74. 74
    Miss Bianca says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Am I the only one who finds the idea of parading military might on Armistice Day missing the point by, like, miles?

    No. But I have a feeling that the whole push to re-name “Veterans Day” from “Armistice Day” helped to politicize the holiday in a different way: we’re no longer making “cessation of warfare” the focus, we’re making “our brave warriors” the focus.

    Not that there’s anything *wrong* with that, necessarily, but it’s a different vibe.

    Hell, at this rate, they might just end up re-naming it “Commander-in-Chief Bigly” Day, which would make a military parade *totally* appropriate.

  75. 75
    aimai says:

    @cain: So what? Or what follows? Miller has only as much power as Trump and every other Republican on Congress grants him. He’s got no armies. If Ryan and Mcconnell want a deal badly enough they will overrule Miller. The truth is that their interests are aligned, and that is the only reason Miller has any power. But if his anti-immigrant hate on starts to affect the republicans, all bets are off. Someone will be able to defenestrate Miller in a hot second by leaking something something about how he thinks he’s better than Trump.

  76. 76
    Anonymous At Work says:

    @Adam L Silverman: Is the discomfort with spending it within the Pentagon’s rulebook for spending, or just finding projects to shovel money at? The latter doesn’t seem like a problem. The former…well, a 200-page and triplicate typed form for extra mops to deal with flop sweat will have to be rushed.

  77. 77
    randy khan says:

    @aimai:

    Nancy Pelosi is the real deal and always has been. She is nobody’s sucker.

    Amen.

  78. 78
    aimai says:

    @TenguPhule: You never, ever, get any smarter, do you? Its always about optics and bitch slap politics for you.

  79. 79
    TenguPhule says:

    @aimai:

    Its always about optics and bitch slap politics for you.

    Watch and see. Our left flank is about to take a fucking pounding if that deal passes.

  80. 80
    jl says:

    @Adam L Silverman: Thanks. Makes sense.I forgot about things like bidding cycles and personnel hiring decisions. I guess it’snot all picking tanks and ammo off the rack and plunking down wads of cash at the checkout counter.

  81. 81
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Anonymous At Work: You can’t just reprogram funds on the fly. Everything, other than discretionary, is allotted to something. So if you’ve got money in your construction budget that you can’t spend, but need to hire personnel, you can’t program that without approval. And depending on what it is, that approval has to come from Congress.

  82. 82
    randy khan says:

    @TenguPhule:

    If you continue to insist that the Dems aren’t fighting for people, as they get a long-term CHIP extension, funding for community health centers, increases in domestic spending that the Republicans don’t want, and House and Senate votes on DACA, some people might believe you.

    While Latino voters might or might not be as sophisticated as African American voters, I’m sure they’re smart enough to know which party got a DACA fix to the floor for a vote and which party voted against it.

  83. 83
    Leto says:

    @Immanentize:

    We should tell Satby to start working on Base PX contracts.

    If you think you can get an AAFES contract negotiated in a quarter, then I’m 100% certain you’ll be interested in YOOGE investment opportunity I have for you involving cryptocurrency and tulips!

  84. 84
    randy khan says:

    @TenguPhule:

    Kindly try not to contribute to that false narrative yourself, then.

  85. 85
    randy khan says:

    @Leto:

    I’m 100% certain you’ll be interested in YOOGE investment opportunity I have for you involving cryptocurrency and tulips!

    BitBulbs!!

    CryptoPollination!!!

  86. 86
    Roger Moore says:

    @aimai:

    The truth is that their interests are aligned, and that is the only reason Miller has any power.

    So much this. The same thing is true of the Free Dumb Caucasians. The reason Boehner and Ryan give them an effective veto on critical legislation isn’t because they have some kind of magic power. It’s because they’re a convenient group to take the blame for blocking things that are popular with the general public but unpopular with the Republican donor class.

  87. 87
    Cermet says:

    When you say

    the Hastert Rule” that is utter and complete bullshit – call it by its proper name: The republican pedophile rule. Got it? So stop aiding and abiding the thug party – call a spade a spade and a pedophile a pedophile. That low life asswipe republican (but those verbs are redundant) created the rule, it was tagged to him so fucking make them own it, god damn!

  88. 88
    Corner Stone says:

    @Leto:

    then I’m 100% certain you’ll be interested in YOOGE investment opportunity I have for you involving cryptocurrency and tulips!

    Throw in a Public/Private funding model and I am all in!

  89. 89
    Corner Stone says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    They’re going to have about 30 to 45 days to spend 80% of their budget.

    I could be wrong, but it sounds to me like one Dr. Adam L. Silverman may be spending a lot less time at BJ in the near future.

  90. 90
    Leto says:

    @randy khan: You’re hired as marketing/PR director!

    Gold, Jerry… gold!!!

  91. 91
    Corner Stone says:

    @Adam L Silverman: The blurb I heard from McConnell on DACA was that an amendment process would be added. I’m looking for a transcript but haven’t found one yet.

  92. 92
    TenguPhule says:

    @randy khan:

    If you continue to insist that the Dems aren’t fighting for people, as they get a long-term CHIP extension, funding for community health centers, increases in domestic spending that the Republicans don’t want, and House and Senate votes on DACA, some people might believe you.

    I am not saying that. I’m saying that DACA proponents and a large chunk of the public are going to see that the Democratic party made a lot of noise about this initially and then decided in the end that just because they weren’t going to win this fight, gave in to the Republicans on it. All those people who were rallying and calling their Senators and Representatives about DACA support are not just going to go away quietly. And emotions are often not rational.

    While Latino voters might or might not be as sophisticated as African American voters, I’m sure they’re smart enough to know which party got a DACA fix to the floor for a vote and which party voted against it.

    We know they’re probably not going to vote for Republicans, but that doesn’t mean they’ll automatically vote for Democrats. Seeing the Democrats trade away leverage for a promise worth less then the paper it was written on is not a motivator to vote for them. If our Senators don’t take any risks for the Hispanics, why would they take any risks to vote for them in return?

  93. 93
    Fair Economist says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    harumph. I guess I allowed myself to believe a pre-February 8 vote was part of the deal. I hope there at least was a deadline. Not a fan of the “we can negotiate as soon as you throw away all your leverage” tactic.

    Schumer is making this deal because the Senate is *very* friendly to a tolerable DACA fix. The Senate has passed immigration reform on multiple occasions. This time there are apparently about 40 Senators, from both sides of the aisle, working on the fix. The Senate will pass a fix, and Schumer knows it, and that’s why he’s letting this through.

    Yes, there is still the problem of getting it through the House. But if your complaint is that the House won’t obey the Senate Minority Leader of the opposite party, it’s time for a reality check. The reality is that Schumer has done everything he can, and Pelosi is currently doing everything *she* can. If it’s not enough the problem isn’t ill will or incompetent negotiating on either’s part, it’s that the Democrats can’t get much done with minimal power. All they can do is stop the Republicans from getting their goals accomplished, and they’ve done a great job on that. No trifecta has accomplished less for forty years, and even some non-trifectas have accomplished more for the lead party (e.g. Reagan 81-82, Bush 01-02).

  94. 94
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Corner Stone: At this point who knows. I’ve lost at least three full time equivalent jobs to the rolling CRs over the past two years. And a couple to the sequester. One was a combo. These are both civil service opportunities and contractor opportunities.

  95. 95
    Fair Economist says:

    @TenguPhule:

    If our Senators don’t take any risks for the Hispanics, why would they take any risks to vote for them in return?

    I don’t think Hispanics are stupid.

    If the Democrats are returned to power, we will get a comprehensive and generous immigration reform. If they aren’t, we’ll get pogroms and deportations. It’s that simple: elections have consequences. So what will Hispanic voters do?

  96. 96
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Corner Stone: Correct. He’ll put up a dummy bill as a shell, then the amendment process will be used to try to fill that shell with something that can reach 60 votes to invoke cloture, end debate, and move to a simple majority vote.

  97. 97
    TenguPhule says:

    @Fair Economist:

    It’s that simple: elections have consequences. So what will Hispanic voters do?

    So we’re hoping they’re smarter and more rational then white voters.

  98. 98
    Fair Economist says:

    @TenguPhule:

    So we’re hoping they’re smarter and more rational then white voters.

    No, less evil. The white Republican voters, for the most part, know the consequences. They’re just willing to eat sparrows off a curtain rod under a freeway overpass as long as Hispanics get deported and African-Americans get shot by police.

  99. 99
    The Moar You Know says:

    As I wrote yesterday, it doesn’t matter what the Democrats do at this point, my professional estimate is that there will be no DACA fix.

    @Adam L Silverman: I agree. As some sage noted a while back, “elections have consequences”. We fucked up badly in 2016, I still don’t really understand the totality of how that happened, nobody does, but the scoreboard speaks for itself. Shouldn’t have even been close but it was. And we lost a must-win and set back progress on all fronts in this nation by decades. Well, I’m hoping it’s “decades” and not “centuries”.

  100. 100
    Nancy says:

    So why not propose to use the money they want for the stupid parade to give raises to the military or more funding to the VA.

  101. 101
    TenguPhule says:

    @Nancy:

    So why not propose to use the money they want for the stupid parade to give raises to the military or more funding to the VA.

    Because Trump would derive no sexual pleasure from it.

  102. 102
    terraformer says:

    I was at the gym earlier today watching the talking heads on CNN.

    When someone brought up the same point about how the mouth-breathers will be against “raising the deficit”, I was waiting, and waiting, and waiting, for one of them to mention the enormous deficit created by the R tax bill.

    But no, no one mentioned that at all. I suppose I should know better, as if it would make any difference if someone had reminded viewers of it. But damn that’s an easy-peasy slow ball right there.

    I wonder how many D’s will fail to mention this if “the deficit” comes up in discussion?

  103. 103
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @The Moar You Know: Russian active measures/cyberwarfare aside, there has never been a period of socio-political and socio-economic progress, let alone just social progress, in the US that hasn’t been met by an immediate, organized, forceful attempt at pushback. Sometimes the initial pushback doesn’t work, but the forces driving the pushback play a long game and eventually gain traction. In this case the pushback was immediate. And it is clear that the forces driving it have connections to the Russians whose active measures contributed to the outcome of the election.

  104. 104
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Nancy: Exactly.

  105. 105
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Fair Economist:

    If the Democrats are returned to power, we will get a comprehensive and generous immigration reform. If they aren’t, we’ll get pogroms and deportations. It’s that simple: elections have consequences. So what will Hispanic voters do?

    Vote republican because their churches tell them that Democrats are baby killers

  106. 106
    rikyrah says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    This is a good summary, Silverman.

  107. 107
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @rikyrah: I name all my good summaries Silverman.

  108. 108
    Gelfling 545 says:

    @Corner Stone: It was for 6 years. Ten is better because for some reason it has a lesser effect on the deficit. How or why, i have no idea.

  109. 109
    Adam L Silverman says:

    @Gelfling 545: The savings that result from not having to treat seriously ill children in emergency rooms over a ten year window make funding CHIP for a decade revenue neutral. If I recall the reporting correctly it may actually generate revenue to fund it, as in the amount of money it saves drives the deficit down.

  110. 110
    Corner Stone says:

    @Gelfling 545: They always knew that a 10 year extension was the best outcome. They had dollar rankings to the savings that timeframe offered, over a shorter one like 6. My point being, we got to the 10 year extension (if this is passed) without a shutdown or all the histrionics about removing hostages as a win.

  111. 111
    patroclus says:

    The Dems aren’t “giving up their leverage” as some have suggested. What has been announced is a proposed budget resolution, which, under regular order, is necessary to set the spending caps for annual appropriations bills, which then must be passed by 10/1 every year. The Republicans blew all that off in 2017 to focus instead on repealing the ACA. So, we have no budget and we’ve had no appropriations bills for this year – FY 2018. if this budget resolution passes (a big if), the Dems will still have the leverage on future CR’s (because we will still need them until the appropriations bills are enacted) and on the appropriations bills themselves. In exchange for the Dems keeping the government open, McConnell has promised a debate and votes on a DACA fix. Pelosi is attempting to force Ryan to agree to the same thing – she’s delivering a 8-hour long “filibuster” today on the House Floor as part of that strategy. If that works, the Senate debate and votes will be followed by consideration by the House.

    So, what the Dems are doing is precisely the opposite of “giving up their leverage on DACA.” They instead are using their leverage to try to force consideration of the issue by both Houses. As Adam says, it still isn’t likely that a deal will be reached – there remain substantial hurdles (and Trump himself is the biggest hurdle), but what the Dems are doing is fighting for a DACA/Dreamer deal as hard as they can (while being in the minority), not throwing the Dreamers under the bus (which is the Russiabot/Trump characterization).

    The announced deal is pretty good, it’s got expanded military and domestic caps, it’s got a 4-year extension of CHIP, it’s got community health centers, it’s got the CDC and NIH, it’s got disaster funding and a lot more. And it’s for 2-years which would take us to 10/1/19 and solves this year’s fiasco. But CR’s will still be needed until regular appropriations bills are considered and enacted (which may or may not happen). It’s a proposed return to regular order, which will enhance Dem leverage and it contains commitments for consideration in the Senate and (possibly) in the House for the Dreamers. This is good news.

  112. 112
    🌎 🇺🇸 Goku (aka The Hope of the Universe) 🗳 🌷 says:

    @Tilda Swintons Bald Cap:
    I know this is frowned upon, but can’t these media idiots be intimidated to not say stupid shit like this?

  113. 113
    catclub says:

    @Adam L Silverman:

    What she is trying to do is leverage her caucus’s votes to get a clean DACA fix bill next week.

    I think this is the best they can get, because, as some have noted, the polling is not good on protecting dreamers.
    Stopping the budget bill risks the GOP passing it by themsleves.

    I guess that the House may then pass a bill that Trump vetoes, then we all at least know where we stand, and the lie that Trump or the GOP wanted to ‘take care of’ the Dreamers gets put to bed.

  114. 114
    TenguPhule says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Vote republican because their churches tell them that Democrats are baby killers

    I wish that didn’t have the ring of truth to it.

    “Law & order” religious “IGMFY”

  115. 115
    TenguPhule says:

    @patroclus: An informative and interesting explanation which contains information I had not known. Thank you. And I hope you’re right about this.

  116. 116
    patroclus says:

    @catclub: When polled as a separate issue, the Dreamers have 70-80% support. Only when polled as one hostage v. another hostage (do you support the Dreamers ar would you rather the government stay open?) does the support fall.

    Nancy, right now, has been speaking on the House Floor since 10:00 a.m. reading letters from and stories about Dreamers – the Dems, led by her, are currently courageously fighting for the Dreamers with everything they have. I am surprised that some think that they are instead tanking the Dreamers’ chances.

  117. 117
    TenguPhule says:

    @patroclus:

    I am surprised that some think that they are instead tanking the Dreamers’ chances.

    House wasn’t a concern, the Senate is. Pelosi has a history of coming through, Schumer not so much.

  118. 118
    patroclus says:

    Nancy has now set the record for the longest speech on the House Floor since 1909. It is a tradition of the House that the minority leader will be heard (and the Republicans can not therefore shut her up) and she is taking full advantage today of that tradition. And ALL OF IT is devoted to fighting for the Dreamers.

    Now, she’s reading from the Gospel of Matthew!

  119. 119
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @TenguPhule: House wasn’t a concern, the Senate is. Pelosi has a history of coming through, Schumer not so much.

    The House wasn’t a concern for what? the reason we didn’t get comprehensive immigration reform in ’13 was cause Boehner wouldn’t bring it to a vote. Ryan is nuttier than Boehner and trying please Daddy Trump

  120. 120
    TenguPhule says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    The House wasn’t a concern for what?

    Fighting. Recall that the last time Schumer made the deal while Pelosi made Ryan pass it pretty much on his own.

  121. 121
    Jim, Foolish Literalist says:

    @TenguPhule: Fighting. … Pelosi made Ryan pass it pretty much on his own.

    what bill are you taking about? what did we win?

  122. 122
    Roger Moore says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Vote republican because their churches tell them that Democrats are baby killers

    Hispanic voters haven’t been doing that, so I see no particular reason they would change their minds now. It’s not as if the Democratic position on abortion is new.

  123. 123
    TenguPhule says:

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    what bill are you taking about? what did we win?

    The last CR. We won a two day shutdown.

  124. 124
    randy khan says:

    @TenguPhule:

    If your characterization were correct, I’d be worried, but it’s not, so I’m not nearly so concerned.

  125. 125
    patroclus says:

    Standing ovation for a 7+ hour Dreamer speech for Nancy Pelosi! Well done!

  126. 126
    VeniceRiley says:

    @scuffletuffle: Oh yeah! Big blow up ™ MISSiles like Macy’s parade balloons! A bunch of amputee veterans led by Tammy Duckworth … (Come to think of it, I bet her insulting him is the reason for his idea.)
    OR- We can even have an alternative parade that is better attended and he will be embarrassed.

    PS- I need that FQHC funding. It is responsible for my paycheck.

  127. 127
    Bill Arnold says:

    @Immanentize:

    But the GOP threat to legal immigration is a serious threat to our economy.

    Indeed. Damage being done all over; the damage to US sciences (and that includes US industry) already being done is considerable and probably irreparable.
    Personally pissed off. Irritated. (Just today I am dealing secondhand with an instance of this, no details sorry, but it’s the US’s loss due to the eat-the-children-stupidity of our current federal government.)

Comments are closed.