Conservative budget amendment fails House amid fissure among Republicans
A conservative budget proposal that would have cut an additional $22 billion across federal agencies on top of the $61 billion in cuts already proposed by House Republicans failed the House Friday amid sharp disagreements among Republicans over just how far Congress should go in seeking to rein in federal spending.
More than 90 Republicans voted against the amendment, sponsored by Republican Study Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (Ohio).
The final 147 to 281 vote saw members of the House Republican leadership splitting their votes, with House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.) and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (Calif.) voting against the measure and Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (Wis.) and Republican Caucus Chairman Jeb Hensarling (Texas) voting in favor.
The measure would have achieved its $22 billion in additional cuts by making trims of 11 percent across the legislative branch and of 5.5 percent to all other non-security accounts, not including U.S. aid to Israel.
In 45 minutes of debate Friday afternoon that exposed sharp disagreements within the GOP, at least 10 Republicans spoke out in favor of the amendment, all of them members of the RSC. Roughly an equal number of Republicans took to the floor to oppose the amendment; half of them were members of the RSC, whose membership includes more than 170 conservative House Republicans. All of the Democrats who spoke during Friday's floor debate opposed the RSC amendment.
The Republican-vs.-Republican dynamic of the debate led to a few direct confrontations.
California Republican Rep. Dan Lungren, who warned earlier Friday that the amendment would "paralyze" the U.S. Capitol Police, was greeted with applause from opponents of the RSC amendment after arguing that "across-the-board cuts are a lazy member's way to achieve something."
He was rebutted immediately by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), an RSC member who had brought the amendment to the floor on Jordan's behalf.
"I would take issue with saying any member of this house is lazy or that this is a lazy process," Blackburn said, contending that "26 states have used across-the-board cuts to get their fiscal house in order."
Georgia Republican Rep. Jack Kingston described himself as a "proud RSC member" who opposed the amendment because he argued that an across-the-board cut would put Obama administration officials in charge of the decision-making on how to cut.
"I've got to say to my conservative friends, when you cut across the board, who do you think is going to be in charge of where these cuts come from?" Kingston asked.
Illinois Republican Rep. Joe Walsh backed the deep cuts called for by the amendment, noting that his brother sent him a text message Thursday night to say, "Keep the cuts comin', baby!" Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) also defended the measure.
"What we're doing here is a rounding error compared to what we're going to have to do with entitlement spending," Flake said.
Meanwhile, Rep. Bill Posey (R-Fla.) said he opposed the amendment because he didn't want national security funds to be subjected to an across-the-board cut. The next two speakers were both Republicans, one who supported the measure and another who opposed it.
Then Jordan spoke out in support of his own amendment. "If we don't do this, our future for our kids and our grandkids is diminished," he said.
He was followed by three Republicans -- Reps. Kay Granger (Texas), Tom Latham (Iowa) and Jo Ann Emerson (Mo.) -- who opposed the amendment.
"I realize it's a well-intentioned effort, but it goes too far," Emerson said.
Democrats took their share of shots at the amendment, too. Virginia Democratic Rep. Jim Moran called it "irresponsible" and "imbalanced."
"This amendment would commit this country to an economic death spiral," Moran said.
Washington Democratic Rep. Norm Dicks, ranking member on the Appropriations Committee, criticized the amendment as "misguided," arguing that it would cut spending indiscriminately.
"This is a meat-axe approach on top of a meat-axe approach. It's a double-meat-axe approach," Dicks said.
The opposition to the RSC amendment was striking in light of the emphasis House Republicans have given to making deep cuts to federal spending in the wake of their victory in the November midterms. A vote on the entire resolution funding the federal government may be pushed into the weekend as lawmakers debate hundreds of amendments.
No comments:
Post a Comment