Congressional Lawmakers Reach Agreement On Spending Bill

The leaders of Congress attend a ceremony on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2013, to remember the young victims of the 1963 firebombing in Birmingham, Ala., during the Civil Rights Movement. From left... The leaders of Congress attend a ceremony on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2013, to remember the young victims of the 1963 firebombing in Birmingham, Ala., during the Civil Rights Movement. From left are, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Ky., House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev., and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of Calif. A statue of Rosa Parks is at center. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

WASHINGTON (AP) — Time running short, Republicans and Democrats agreed Tuesday on a $1.1 trillion spending bill to avoid a government shutdown and delay a politically-charged struggle over President Barack Obama’s new immigration policy until the new year.

The compromise will permit virtually the entire government to operate normally through the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year, with the exception of the Department of Homeland Security.

Funds for that one agency will run out again in late winter. That will give Republicans an opportunity to try to use the expiration as leverage to force Obama to roll back a decision that will suspend the threat of deportation for an estimated 4 million immigrants living in the country illegally.

Officials said full details of the measure would be available later Tuesday, once it was posted online.

Several officials said the measure would include a provision permitting multiemployer pension funds to reduce benefits to current retirees, as part of an effort to prevent the slow-motion collapse of a system that provides retirement income to millions.

“The federal government’s going to run out of money in two days. … We’ve been trying to work with Republican leaders to avoid a shutdown,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said in midafternoon as final negotiations dragged on.

The GOP high command said they wanted nothing of the kind, and Speaker John Boehner said he expected a vote in the House on the spending bill by Thursday. Failing that, officials said they would prepare a short-term measure to assure uninterrupted operations of government for a day or two to provide enough time for the larger bill to clear both houses.

The events coincided with the end of an era of Democratic control of the Senate. Republicans will have a majority in January after gaining nine seats in midterm elections, and newly elected GOP senators-elect participated in closed-door strategy sessions during the day.

Before time runs out on his majority, Reid said he wanted to assure confirmation of nine more of Obama’s judicial nominees and approve the appointment of Vivek Murthy as surgeon general.

Also on Congress’ must-do list is legislation to renew a series of expiring tax breaks, and a bill to authorize the Pentagon to train and equip Syrian rebels to fight Islamic State forces in the Middle East.

Not all Republicans agreed with the strategy of postponing a fight over immigration. Some conservative lawmakers demanded a change in the spending measure to deny the use of federal funds to carry out the president’s new policy. The leadership ruled otherwise, gambling that even with conservative defections, enough bipartisan support existed for the funding bill to assure its passage.

House Republicans removed one obstacle to passage of the spending measure by announcing they would pass legislation separately to renew a requirement for the federal government to assume some of the insurance risk in losses arising from terrorism.

In talks with Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Republicans led by Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas., agreed to the renewal, but said they wanted to roll back portions of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that tightened federal regulation on the financial sector.

The stand-alone bill seemed likely to clear the House, but its fate in the Senate was uncertain.

By contrast, disagreement over an emerging proposal relating to multi-employer pension funds was not along party lines.

Officials said the talks led by Rep. John Kline, R-Min., and George Miller, D-Calif., were designed to preserve benefits of current and future retirees at lower levels than currently exist, but higher than they would be if their pension funds ran out of money.

Also driving the talks was concern over the financial fate of the fund that assures multi-employer pensions at the government’s Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. The agency said in its most recent annual report that the fund’s deficit rose to $42.2 billion in the fiscal year ending Sept, 30, up from $8.3 billion the previous year, and that the likelihood of its bankruptcy is 90 percent by 2025.

Agency figures show as many as 1.5 million retirees could be affected by any change in law to permit a reduction. An estimated 400,000 of them receive benefits from the Teamsters’ Central States Pension Fund.

The spending bill was a work in trade-offs carried out under strict budget caps negotiated in past struggles between Republicans and the White House.

Republicans targeted domestic agencies such as the IRS and the Environmental Protection Agency for cuts while Democrats sought to preserve Amtrak subsidies and Transportation Department “TIGER” grants to state and local governments for infrastructure projects.

___

Associated Press writers Connie Cass and Erica Werner contributed to this report.

Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. “…wanted to roll back portions of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law that tightened federal regulation on the financial sector”

    Fuck that noise.

  2. “The compromise will permit virtually the entire government to operate
    normally through the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year, with the exception
    of the Department of Homeland Security.”

    Well gee, who needs the DHS anyway?
    Here’s a list of the agencies this dept runs:

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
    U.S. Customs and Border Protection
    Federal Emergency Management Agency
    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
    Transportation Security Administration
    U.S. Coast Guard
    National Protection and Programs Directorate
    U.S. Secret Service

    Of course the GOP isn’t interested in fixing immigration…we know this but why gut FEMA? what do we do when the next disaster hits?
    Do we shut down TSA at all our airports? ISIS would love that.
    What does the GOP have against the Coast guard?
    Should we shut down the Secret Service and let counterfeiters off the hook not to mention the protection that dept. afforeds senior government officials. Boehner has SS protection as 3 rd in line to the Presidency after all

    It looks to me like the GOP is trying mighty hard to shoot themselves somewhere other than just in their foot this time.

  3. “…The compromise…”

    All Republicans are RINOs at heart. I guess the Tea Party really is a joke.

  4. Go ahead, Republicans, and put Homeland Security on a leash. Then next year, when the temporary funding runs out and they try holding something else hostage to pay for it, we’ll ask every Republican running for president if hamstringing this agency is good for national security.

  5. Derivatives killed the pension safety net so the GOP and WS want Dodd Frank weakened?

    DC is getting analized on legal POT funding, an Australian company gets a free rein on 2400 hundred pristine acres of ‘copper’ in AZ.

    If I were O’ Mon, I’d tell the Senate cut the crap out in committee or not sign it.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

4 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for lestatdelc Avatar for Robman2 Avatar for randyabraham Avatar for cvilledem Avatar for sherlock1 Avatar for docb Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for darrtown

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: