Omni-fuss Over the Omnibus

From Politico:

After an angry, swearing late night meeting among top Democrats, Congress voted Friday to give itself another five days to try to complete a long-overdue omnibus spending bill that had become a growing embarrassment for party leaders and President Barack Obama.

Senate Democrats had abruptly pulled back Thursday night after finding themselves one vote short of the 60 needed to cut off debate. The action infuriated Speaker Nancy Pelosi so much that the California Democrat wanted to abandon the $409.6 billion measure and instead push through a stripped-down continuing resolution to keep the government operating through Sept. 30.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-Nev.) and his deputy, Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D.-Ill.) were called to Pelosi’s office late Thursday night and ultimately prevailed in their argument that Democrats should try to salvage the bill, which includes critical spending increases for vital agencies. But the heated, sometimes profane, exchanges were described as “ugly” by Democrats on both sides of the Capitol. Staff, kicked out in the hall, could hear the yelling, and Pelosi herself seemed a little abashed the next day, joking that nothing her leadership could say to her now would match the night before.

Original DVD cover.

The speaker’s anger was directed primarily at Senate Republicans, who withheld their support even when they had substantial interests in the measure. Pelosi feels that Republicans are gaming the Democrats, who have to be tougher in turn by forcing them to live with the consequences of what she sees as obstruction.


With funding running out Friday, Pelosi finally called her members back to Washington to pass the five day extension on a 328-58 vote.


Behind the scenes, Reid had to struggle with one in his own leadership, Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who was upset with Cuba-related provisions in the bill. Efforts were under way to try to win back the New Jersey Democrat with a letter from Treasury addressing his concerns, but these appear to have been unsuccessful.

The bigger dynamic was on the Republican side, where Minority Whip John [sic] Kyl (R.-Ariz.) appeared to play a greater than usual role in pulling back votes from the Democrats.

Reid complained privately that a last minute Republican switch left him exposed after announcing the 8:15 p.m. vote.


In fact, a solid bloc of Republicans—including some in the party leadership—are prepared to help pass the bill but remain shy of voting with Democrats until their colleagues have had a chance to offer more amendments.


As agreed to Friday, about a dozen amendments will now be considered by Tuesday night. If any are adopted, it would mean that the House would have to take up the bill again, which is why the deadline was extended to Wednesday to allow some leeway.


Filling 1,132 pages, the sprawling bill is really nine bills in one, covering more than 12 Cabinet-level departments and agencies that represent the heart of the domestic budget this year, as well as U.S. contributions to global health and foreign aid programs overseas.

The total cost represents a nearly $20 billion, or 5 percent, increase over the Bush administration’s spending requests for many of the same accounts. Rather than engage in veto fights last fall, Democrats opted to postpone action until Obama took power in January.

Reid’s dilemma has been that to win over Republican support, he had to be willing to allow votes on amendments. But to meet Friday’s deadline, he had to be prepared to kill whatever the GOP offered so that the measure didn’t have to go back to the House for further consultation.

Thus, some otherwise popular initiatives, such as increasing funding for Native-American health programs, were scuttled. And Democrats had to rally behind sometimes embarrassing earmarks that had been negotiated between the two chambers back in December.

“The hang-up is the majority leader apparently doesn’t want to allow a vote that might win because the speaker doesn’t want the bill back,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.). “Well, that’s the way Congress works. We have conferences. We have disagreements. I don’t see what the urgency is. I don’t see what the problem is.”

Not as a Republican. The party has been delighted — on a daily basis — in pounding the White House for not being willing to veto the bill.

Leading the charge has been Obama’s old rival, Sen. John McCain. Again Thursday, the Arizona Republican rose on the floor to lecture the president about the need to take a tougher stand against earmarks.

[McCain said,] “The president should veto this bill and send it back to Congress and tell ’em to clean it up.”

But Obama has other tools in his kit, including the power to recommend rescissions this April, when he is already scheduled to send Congress the details of his appropriations requests for the new fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.

Such rescissions are still subject to approval by Congress but would allow the new president to separate himself more from past practices even as he presses for tighter spending caps on such projects in the future.


But rescissions would allow Obama to push the earmark issue back into the lap of Congress — free of the larger spending bill, which he feels compelled to sign. And while lawmakers are free to ignore his recommendations, the effort would put more punch behind Obama’s promise to impose tighter caps in the future.

The House and Senate Appropriations committees argue that the bill already represents a 50 percent reduction from earmarks in 2006, the last full-fledged year of spending bills under Republican control of the House and Senate. But Democrats fully expect Obama’s final 2010 budget to demand a still lower cap, and the administration has not ruled out seeking rescissions as well.



Filed under Barack Obama, Chimpy, Congress, Democrats, Dick Durbin, George W. Bush, Harry Reid, House Appropriations Committee, humor, John McCain, Jon Kyl, Lamar Alexander, movies, Nancy Pelosi, parody, politics, Republicans, Senate, Senate Appropriations Committee, snark, Wordpress Political Blogs

22 responses to “Omni-fuss Over the Omnibus

  1. Yet another reason we need 60 Democrats in the Senate.

  2. I can’t fu¢king believe the democrats STILL let the GOP get away with what they do.

    I am LOVING how tough Pelosi has been, it’s changing my mind about her, for sure.

    The rethuglicans just suck, suck SUCK!!!

    • helen,
      the senate rules should be changed. everything should not require 60 votes to pass. this is a democracy, and 50% + 1 is the way it’s supposed to work. i can understand needing 60 for something like amending the constitution, but not for everyday business.

  3. Jenn/jlms qkw

    wow nonnie, i had not heard this at all! good for nancy.

    you rock, btw.

    • jenn,
      i read about it last night. i didn’t hear a word about it on the news, and i watched msnbc all night.

      p.s. you rock, too!
      p.p.s. didja find dick durbin and robert menendez?

  4. jeb

    This is why we need out-year budgeting. The budget should be for two years and debated and voted on in odd number years when the house and senate are not running around trying to get re-elected. This would be good for the country but will never happen because pols can run back and claim how they did / didn’t support the budget because it’s good / ruinous for the nation.

    We sacrifice the good for the ambitions of career politicians.

  5. nightowl724

    Nice work, nonnie. Love the title!

  6. i didnt think i could hate the GOP more than under bush – but i do

    this just shows how much Washington really doesnt care about the 300,000,000 others out there

  7. In other news, jotter recognized five of your photoshops as top comments with pictures from this past week.


  8. Dusty

    They sure has hell ARE gaming the Dem’s. That’s obvious.

    So the Dem’s better rent a set of nads and do something about it. I have more faith in Pelosi than Reid…although both make me sick.