The Topline: The House voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to repeal the $6 billion cut to military pensions, which was paid for by extending the sequester for mandatory Medicare spending for one year.
But Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidHarry ReidRepublican failure Senate about to enter 'nuclear option' death spiral Top GOP senator: 'Tragic mistake' if Democrats try to block Gorsuch MORE (D-Nev.) quickly poured cold water on the House legislation, and Senate Democrats appeared to be following suit, leaving the fate of the pension cuts up in the air.
The House measure paid for the COLA repeal by extending the mandatory Medicare sequester caps by one year, to 2024. The caps were already extended two years in the December 2013 budget deal.
Reid, however, said that he was opposed to using that offset on the pension bill, although he had proposed the same offset on an extension of unemployment insurance benefits last month.
“That pay-for, remember, that was my unemployment compensation extension. They didn’t like that. But now they like it,” Reid said at a press conference Tuesday. “This shows the absurdity of the lack of common sense and reasoning that Republicans in Congress have.”
Democrats are pushing for the Senate to pass the bill this week from Sen. Mark PryorMark PryorMedicaid rollback looms for GOP senators in 2020 Cotton pitches anti-Democrat message to SC delegation Ex-Sen. Kay Hagan joins lobby firm MORE (D-Ark.) and other vulnerable 2014 Senate Democrats, which does not offset the restoration of the $6 billion cut.
They’re pressing Republicans to vote against repealing the cuts for military retirees in an election year.
“You’re either for veterans or you’re not. That’s the vote we’re taking,” Sen. Mark BegichMark BegichPerez creates advisory team for DNC transition The future of the Arctic 2016’s battle for the Senate: A shifting map MORE (D-Alaska) said at a press conference with Pryor and other Democrats. “At the end of the day, it’s a simple repeal. This is not complicated to do.”
But Republicans are opposed to that approach, arguing that the $6 billion can be easily offset and should be paid for so the deficit is not increased.
“Our view is that it ought to be fixed by paying for it and not adding to the deficit,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnellMitch McConnellThe truth is the latest casualty of today’s brand of politics McCain and Graham: We won't back short-term government funding bill Senate seen as starting point for Trump’s infrastructure plan MORE (R-Ky.).
Republicans will get a vote on an amendment from Sen. Kelly AyotteKelly AyotteFEC commissioner to Trump: Prove voter fraud Live coverage: Day three of Supreme Court nominee hearing Lewandowski saw no evidence of voter fraud in New Hampshire MORE (R-N.H.) to offset the cost by preventing illegal immigrants from claiming the additional child tax credit, a measure that Democrats are opposed to.
Sen. Lindsey GrahamLindsey GrahamOvernight Finance: Dems seek probe of acting SEC chief | Defense hawks say they won't back short-term funding | Senate seen as start point for Trump infrastructure plan | Dems want more money for IRS Overnight Defense: Pentagon considers more troops for Afghanistan | McCain, Graham won't back short-term funding | GOP defends Trump rules of engagement McCain and Graham: We won't back short-term government funding bill MORE (R-S.C.) said that he didn’t know how he would vote on the bill without an offset.
“If we’re not going to pay for it then the budget deal is broken before the ink is dry,” Graham said. “I shouldn’t have to pick between doing justice to the military retirees and doing justice to future generations.”
The Senate is expected to take up amendment votes and a cloture vote on the Pryor bill later this week as it also moves to approve the clean debt-limit deal.
Top official says Karzai won’t sign security pact: Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said Tuesday that he does not think Afghan President Hamid Karzai will sign a bilateral security agreement with the United States.
“Obviously, it takes two to sign this, and my own view on this, though it may not be company policy, is I don’t believe President Karzai will sign this,” Clapper said at a Senate Armed Services hearing.
Karzai has indicated he wouldn’t sign the bilateral security agreement until after the country’s presidential elections in April, and U.S. lawmakers have increasingly suggested that the Obama administration should just wait for Karzai’s successor to take power.
Clapper is the first high-ranking Obama administration official to state publicly that Karzai is not likely to sign the security pact, which would establish a U.S. presence in Afghanistan after NATO hands off full control of security at the end of 2014.
Chairman Sen. Carl LevinCarl LevinSenate about to enter 'nuclear option' death spiral Devin Nunes has jeopardized the oversight role of Congress Ted Cruz wants to destroy the Senate as we know it MORE (D-Mich.) gave Clapper the opportunity to say whether or not the Obama administration would wait Karzai out, but he deferred, saying it was a policy decision up to the White House.
Afghanistan to release 65 of 88 ‘dangerous’ detainees: U.S.-Afghan relations soured further after an Afghan Review Board announced it would release more detainees the U.S. has said are responsible for the death and injury of American troops.
Last month, the board said it would release 37 of 88 detainees, and on Tuesday said it would now release 28 more, against strong U.S. objections.
The U.S. swiftly condemned the decision in a statement, saying: "The release of 65 detainees is a legitimate force protection concern for the lives of both coalition troops and Afghan National Security Forces. ... The primary weapon of choice for these individuals is the improvised explosive device, widely recognized as the primary cause of civilian casualties in Afghanistan."
“Karzai, in my view, has singlehandedly destroyed this relationship,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Tuesday at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
US military training for Iraq? The U.S. was "planning to step up training" for Iraqi forces as it battles a resurgent al Qaeda there, said Ambassador Anne Patterson, assistant secretary of State for Near Eastern affairs, at a House Armed Services Committee hearing on Tuesday.
“We have also tried to step up training. We’re planning to step up training. We have an enormous foreign military sales and foreign military financing program with Iraq,” Patterson said. She did not specify what kind of training, but may have been referring to civilian contractors providing training on military equipment.
Defense officials have also discussed sending U.S. special operations forces to Jordan to train Iraqi forces as they battle back al Qaeda in Fallujah.
In addition, the U.S. has provided Iraq with hellfire missiles and surveillance drones, and has recently approved the sale of attack helicopters.
Patterson pushed back against notions the U.S. has lost credibility with allies in the region.
“I think it’s very difficult to say that we’ve abandoned the Iraqis because I think we’re very intensively engaged there,” she said.
In Case You Missed It:
— Official: Core al Qaeda may now view Syria as primary battlefield
— Court OKs Guantánamo force-feeding detainees
— Maryland lawmakers look to cut off NSA's water, power
— Order: ‘Destroy’ bin Laden photos
— Clinton to Petraeus: ‘I have experience’
Follow us on Twitter: @DEFCONHill, @JHerbTheHill, @kristina_wong
You can sign up to receive this overnight update via email on The Hill’s homepage.