In budget deal, a secret reward for Dems

The two-year budget deal approved by the House has hidden political benefits for Senate Democrats, Republicans charge. 

Because it sets a top-line budget number for 2015, Democrats won’t have to write and pass a budget resolution in the midterm election year. 

ADVERTISEMENT
That means vulnerable Democrats like Sens. Mark PryorMark Lunsford PryorMedicaid rollback looms for GOP senators in 2020 Cotton pitches anti-Democrat message to SC delegation Ex-Sen. Kay Hagan joins lobby firm MORE (Ark.), Mark BegichMark Peter BegichFormer Alaska senator jumps into governor race Overnight Energy: Trump directs Perry to stop coal plant closures | EPA spent ,560 on customized pens | EPA viewed postcard to Pruitt as a threat Perez creates advisory team for DNC transition MORE (Alaska), Kay Hagen (N.C.) and Mary LandrieuMary Loretta LandrieuLandrieu dynasty faces a pause in Louisiana Senate GOP rejects Trump’s call to go big on gun legislation Project Veritas at risk of losing fundraising license in New York, AG warns MORE (La.) won’t have to take tough votes as part of a budget vote-o-rama. 

Republicans are unhappy, as they believe the tough votes would have made it easier to defeat those candidates next fall and take control off the Senate in 2015. With ObamaCare's difficult rollout, forcing members to vote on many aspects of the healthcare law would be especially appealing. 

The Senate is expected to vote on the budget deal on Tuesday.

Until this spring, when the Senate approved its first budget resolution in four years, Senate Democrats had repeatedly avoided passing a budget in part because of the problems it would have created for vulnerable members.

In two of the years in which the Senate failed to pass a budget, Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidHarry Mason ReidAmendments fuel resentments within Senate GOP Donald Trump is delivering on his promises and voters are noticing Danny Tarkanian wins Nevada GOP congressional primary MORE (D-Nev.) argued budget caps in the 2011 Budget Control Act law meant no resolution was legally necessary. 

Republicans said Reid was wrong then, and he’d be wrong now if he used the new bill to avoid a budget vote.

“Yes, we should do a budget every year, and the Budget Control Act was used as an excuse and it was a poor excuse,” Senate Budget Committee ranking member Jeff SessionsJefferson (Jeff) Beauregard SessionsSessions responds to Nazi comparisons: 'They were keeping the Jews from leaving' Laura Ingraham: Migrant child detention centers 'essentially summer camps' Senate chaplain offers prayer 'as children are being separated from their parents' MORE (R-Ala.) told The Hill on Friday. “It seems to me it would be the same with this.”

At this point, Democrats aren’t committing to doing a new budget.

Eli Zupnick, a spokesman for Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty MurrayPatricia (Patty) Lynn MurrayIBM-led coalition pushes senators for action on better tech skills training Members of Congress demand new federal gender pay audit Overnight Health Care — Sponsored by PCMA — Health chief grilled on Trump drug pricing plan, ObamaCare case MORE (D-Wash.), said she “certainty plans to continue the budget process next year and hopes that Democrats and Republicans could build on the bipartisan work done in the budget conference.”

“One of the benefits of this bipartisan budget deal is that Congress can move away from the constant crises and return to regular order,” he added. “Right now she is focusing on passing this budget deal. Once that’s, done she will work with other members of the committee on the path forward for the FY15 budget.”

A source argued that the deal allows the 12 appropriations bills for 2015 to move forward, and that would open up the chance for tough votes on the floor.  

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul RyanPaul Davis RyanTrump digs in amid uproar on zero tolerance policy Mark Sanford’s troubles did not begin with Trump NY Post blasts Trump, GOP over separating families at border MORE (R-Wis.), at this stage, is committing to doing a budget resolution, his office said, even though it would likely put his conference on record again supporting controversial cuts to Medicare in an election year.

When Senate Democrats brought this year’s budget to the floor, Republicans offered hundreds of amendments. Many of them were controversial and were meant to force Democrats into tough votes, such as backing tax increases.

Four vulnerable Democrats — Pryor, Hagan, Begich and Sen. Max BaucusMax Sieben BaucusClients’ Cohen ties become PR liability Green Party puts Dem seat at risk in Montana Business groups worried about Trump's China tariffs plan MORE (Mont.), who decided against running for reelection — opposed the overall budget, which had nearly $1 trillion in new tax revenue. It squeaked through in a 50-49 vote.

Sessions said the budget is a unique opportunity because the majority leader cannot use a procedural tactic known as filling the amendment tree to block amendments.

“It's the only time in the entire legislative process by which individual senators can get a vote on an amendment they care about because of this unprecedented filling of the tree keeps anybody from getting an amendment,” he said. 

Sessions is also unhappy about another aspect of this year’s budget deal.

It would suspend a procedural point of order in the Senate against using revenue increases to offset new spending in the coming fiscal year.

That point of order has been used several times recently by Republicans to stop revenue-raising legislation.

Defenders of the deal argue that Republicans could still use the filibuster against a tax increase, though they acknowledge the point of order has been weakened in the deal.