Preheating the Oven (A Capitol Hill Update)
By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, Government Affairs, AAMVA
Things are heating up and there’s a lot going on this week on Capitol Hill, so I’m going to try and cover a number of different topics that are (and I can’t believe I’m saying this) simultaneously divergent and convergent. They’re divergent in their approach and in how they propose to accomplish expectations. They’re convergent in that they all tie into the political discrepancies between vying parties in the House and Senate and start preheating the pre-election pressure cooker.
First, there has been a truly frenetic pace to the number of appropriations markups being held in their respective Committees this week. Many of them came somewhat unexpectedly, and many of them repeatedly shifted scheduling to make tracking their progress complex. To add to the complexity, Congressional committee staffers have held their drafts and reports very close to the chest, especially in the Senate where rules don’t provide specific guidelines for quick committee disclosure. As I’ve noted before, I don’t expect all the measures to pass separately, and instead expect them to be rolled into an omnibus appropriations measure or a series of continuing resolutions that would continue to fund government operations (hopefully) at their current (though debatable) spending levels. However, taken at face value, these events serve as important indicators of what we can expect in the coming months. The timing of the markups indicates that for all intents and purposes, discussion on what should or should not be included in the appropriations measures has drawn to a close. The timing further indicates that appropriators are working to get their recommendations on paper prior to the November 1st deadline for the recommendations coming from the “Super Committee” or “Deficit Reduction Committee” so that they will have a basis for discussion no matter what mechanism moves forward. In some terms this will likely simplify the measures following the recommendations, and further allow legislators to take into account the deals made during the “debt-limit increase” negotiations held prior to recess. What I take from the push is a strong indication that Committees are rushing to get their proposals moving so that when the Deficit Reduction Committee recommendations come down, and when those tough decisions are being forced through, they’ll have a marker that shows proposed spending and be able to work from there. It also conveys emphasis will likely be put on what gets cut, not what can be added, to these measures. So at this point, all eyes are on getting the economy back on track, tightening belts, and competing for the almighty dollar – likely even amongst Committees.
Secondly, all eyes are on Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn this week. Earlier in the week, the House passed HR 2887 which provided an extension of surface transportation programs for six months by voice vote. Once that bill reached the Senate, Senator Coburn expressed his displeasure by offering an amendment to the bill eliminating the mandatory ten percent set-aside of surface transportation program highway formula funding for “transportation enhancements,” which include bike and pedestrian paths. The objection, due to the timing of the bill, jeopardizes not only surface funding, but also an extension of the Federal Aviation Administration, which without passage of the measure by Friday would cause its second partial shutdown of the year. This puts Coburn in a unique position for leverage, given that the House has adjourned for the week, and any amendment to HR 2887 would essentially cause an FAA shutdown at least until next week.
Third, and just as an ancillary note, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio has suggested that the next surface transportation bill should be linked to energy production. Initially I’m wondering if this means we’ll actually see a surface transportation bill in the coming year. This kind of proposal would help Republicans solve the funding gap in bill comparisons while simultaneously opening up the country’s business prospects in the energy production and extraction sectors, but it would really complicate discrepancies between House Republicans and Senate Democrats on an issue that is already rife with plenty to yell about. The last thing the surface transportation measure needs is to be the central piece for getting America back to work. With both parties leaning that way, I see the probabilities of the bill seeing passage in the near future evaporating.
Fourth, House appropriators have unveiled a continuing resolution that would keep the government running until November 18th after current spending law expires at the end of September. The measure would fund the government at the level agreed upon in the debt limit agreement ($1.043 trillion.) Interestingly, the measure included an expected $3.65 billion in disaster aid, with $1 billion of that funding being offset with cuts to a Department of Energy vehicle efficiency program.
I’d like to close with the mention of the President’s proposed “Jobs Bill.” At this stage, and a cursory initial analysis, I have both plenty and nothing to add. I personally consider the measure likely to thud, applaud the infusion of funds into infrastructure, and won’t hold my breath on its political success - noting that it fuels speculation that the President is simply proposing a “stimulus package part II.” You’re welcome to comment with your own thoughts on his proposal below.
Things are heating up and there’s a lot going on this week on Capitol Hill, so I’m going to try and cover a number of different topics that are (and I can’t believe I’m saying this) simultaneously divergent and convergent. They’re divergent in their approach and in how they propose to accomplish expectations. They’re convergent in that they all tie into the political discrepancies between vying parties in the House and Senate and start preheating the pre-election pressure cooker.
First, there has been a truly frenetic pace to the number of appropriations markups being held in their respective Committees this week. Many of them came somewhat unexpectedly, and many of them repeatedly shifted scheduling to make tracking their progress complex. To add to the complexity, Congressional committee staffers have held their drafts and reports very close to the chest, especially in the Senate where rules don’t provide specific guidelines for quick committee disclosure. As I’ve noted before, I don’t expect all the measures to pass separately, and instead expect them to be rolled into an omnibus appropriations measure or a series of continuing resolutions that would continue to fund government operations (hopefully) at their current (though debatable) spending levels. However, taken at face value, these events serve as important indicators of what we can expect in the coming months. The timing of the markups indicates that for all intents and purposes, discussion on what should or should not be included in the appropriations measures has drawn to a close. The timing further indicates that appropriators are working to get their recommendations on paper prior to the November 1st deadline for the recommendations coming from the “Super Committee” or “Deficit Reduction Committee” so that they will have a basis for discussion no matter what mechanism moves forward. In some terms this will likely simplify the measures following the recommendations, and further allow legislators to take into account the deals made during the “debt-limit increase” negotiations held prior to recess. What I take from the push is a strong indication that Committees are rushing to get their proposals moving so that when the Deficit Reduction Committee recommendations come down, and when those tough decisions are being forced through, they’ll have a marker that shows proposed spending and be able to work from there. It also conveys emphasis will likely be put on what gets cut, not what can be added, to these measures. So at this point, all eyes are on getting the economy back on track, tightening belts, and competing for the almighty dollar – likely even amongst Committees.
Secondly, all eyes are on Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn this week. Earlier in the week, the House passed HR 2887 which provided an extension of surface transportation programs for six months by voice vote. Once that bill reached the Senate, Senator Coburn expressed his displeasure by offering an amendment to the bill eliminating the mandatory ten percent set-aside of surface transportation program highway formula funding for “transportation enhancements,” which include bike and pedestrian paths. The objection, due to the timing of the bill, jeopardizes not only surface funding, but also an extension of the Federal Aviation Administration, which without passage of the measure by Friday would cause its second partial shutdown of the year. This puts Coburn in a unique position for leverage, given that the House has adjourned for the week, and any amendment to HR 2887 would essentially cause an FAA shutdown at least until next week.
Third, and just as an ancillary note, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio has suggested that the next surface transportation bill should be linked to energy production. Initially I’m wondering if this means we’ll actually see a surface transportation bill in the coming year. This kind of proposal would help Republicans solve the funding gap in bill comparisons while simultaneously opening up the country’s business prospects in the energy production and extraction sectors, but it would really complicate discrepancies between House Republicans and Senate Democrats on an issue that is already rife with plenty to yell about. The last thing the surface transportation measure needs is to be the central piece for getting America back to work. With both parties leaning that way, I see the probabilities of the bill seeing passage in the near future evaporating.
Fourth, House appropriators have unveiled a continuing resolution that would keep the government running until November 18th after current spending law expires at the end of September. The measure would fund the government at the level agreed upon in the debt limit agreement ($1.043 trillion.) Interestingly, the measure included an expected $3.65 billion in disaster aid, with $1 billion of that funding being offset with cuts to a Department of Energy vehicle efficiency program.
I’d like to close with the mention of the President’s proposed “Jobs Bill.” At this stage, and a cursory initial analysis, I have both plenty and nothing to add. I personally consider the measure likely to thud, applaud the infusion of funds into infrastructure, and won’t hold my breath on its political success - noting that it fuels speculation that the President is simply proposing a “stimulus package part II.” You’re welcome to comment with your own thoughts on his proposal below.
As is usually the case in this line of work, the Senate passed the FAA, Surface Transportation extension hours after posting. After dispensing with two amendments offered by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) the Senate cleared the bill to extend the FAA through January and the surface transportation programs through the end of March by a vote of 92-6. The measure heads to the President for clearance just before deadline. Apparently Senator Coburn's objections were clarified behind closed doors and he was assured that his concerns would be included in the long-term surface transportation reauthorization measure at a later date.
Reply to this