Lawmakers push to end shutdowns — for good

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill are exploring legislative options that would prevent a repeat of the record 35-day shutdown, and their proposed solutions are drawing interest and support from top congressional leaders.

Members of both parties have introduced bills that would automatically fund the government at existing levels if lawmakers can’t meet statutory budget deadlines.

ADVERTISEMENT

Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiWhy calls for impeachment have become commonplace The Constitution doesn't require a vote to start the impeachment process Louisiana voters head to the polls in governor's race as Trump urges GOP support MORE (D-Calif.) reportedly expressed interest in the idea during a columnist roundtable shortly before the shutdown ended Friday, while Senate Minority Leader Charles SchumerCharles (Chuck) Ellis SchumerTrump defends 'crime buster' Giuliani amid reported probe Louisiana voters head to the polls in governor's race as Trump urges GOP support Trump urges Louisiana voters to back GOP in governor's race then 'enjoy the game' MORE (D-N.Y.) endorsed the approach at a news conference in Manhattan.

“Now that the shutdown is over, we should roll up our sleeves and make sure it never happens again,” Schumer said, according to Newsday.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin Owen McCarthyFive ways Trump's Syria decision spells trouble The Hill's Morning Report — Arrest of Giuliani associates triggers many questions Cheney slated to introduce bill to place sanctions on Turkey MORE (R-Calif.) told NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that he not only supported the legislative proposals out there, he said he would “go further.”

“You want to know how you’ll never have a shutdown again? Let’s not pay the members of Congress and Senate,” McCarthy said.

The push comes as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a report Monday that the shutdown cost the U.S. economy an estimated $11 billion, with $3 billion expected to be permanently lost even after workers receive back pay and services return to normal.

Senators in both parties first pushed the shutdown-prevention idea earlier this month, before the government fully reopened.

Sen. Mark WarnerMark Robert WarnerSenators take fundraising efforts to Nats playoff games Senate Intelligence report triggers new calls for action on election security Senate Intel report urges action to prevent Russian meddling in 2020 election MORE (D-Va.) introduced the Shutdowns Transferring Unnecessary Pain and Inflicting Damage In The Coming Years Act, dubbed the Stop Stupidity Act, which would automatically keep the federal government running at the same funding levels as the previous fiscal year if a spending deadline is missed. The measure would withhold funding for the legislative branch and the Executive Office of the President in an attempt to motivate lawmakers to negotiate.

Another proposal, from Sen. Rob PortmanRobert (Rob) Jones PortmanGOP senator: 'Not appropriate' to ask foreign governments to investigate Biden GOP senator says he doesn't remember signing 2016 letter urging 'reform' of Ukraine prosecutor's office Lobbying World MORE (R-Ohio), would automatically fund the government at existing levels if lawmakers don’t reach an agreement on time. But funding would be reduced by 1 percent after 120 days and again every subsequent 90 days if lawmakers haven’t reached a deal.

While Portman introduced the bill in previous years, both he and Warner are trying to seize newfound momentum following the recent spending impasse that shuttered about 25 percent of the government.

“Let’s do something about it now while the pain and inefficiency of this moment is fresh on our minds,” Portman said on Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT

Funding for agencies affected by the partial government shutdown will lapse again on Feb. 16 unless a new spending agreement is reached. Both Portman and Warner are pushing to include a provision to end future shutdowns in any final funding deal.

“If there’s any good that can come from this shutdown, let’s make sure this is the last time a president is able to shut down the government as a negotiating tactic,” Warner said on the Senate floor Friday. “The final deal should include language that eliminates the practice of shutting down the government.”

But there’s a question of whether President TrumpDonald John TrumpGiuliani says he is unaware of reported federal investigation Louisiana's Democratic governor forced into runoff Lawmakers focus their ire on NBA, not China MORE would sign legislation into law that prevents future shutdowns, since doing so would remove some of the power and leverage wielded by the White House when it comes to spending negotiations.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders neither endorsed nor rejected the proposals during a Monday press briefing.

“I’m not going to get into the hypotheticals of taking that off the table,” she told reporters. “I haven’t seen a piece of legislation for us to even consider at this point that would make that a reality.”

Not all congressional leaders are on board with the idea either.

House Majority Leader Steny HoyerSteny Hamilton HoyerHillicon Valley: Google, Reddit to testify on tech industry protections | Trump joins Amazon-owned Twitch | House to vote on bill to combat foreign interference Overnight Health Care — Presented by Coalition Against Surprise Medical Billing — Judge blocks Trump 'public charge' rule | Appeals court skeptical of Trump arguments for Medicaid work requirements | CDC offers guidance for treating vaping-related cases House to vote this month on legislation to combat foreign interference in elections MORE (D-Md.), who represents a district with thousands of federal workers, has concerns about how such legislation might affect lawmakers’ incentives to enact appropriations on time if automatic funding would kick in regardless.

“He would want to make sure all of the implications were understood before moving forward on any of the proposals,” Hoyer spokeswoman Mariel Saez said.

There are also some conservatives wary of authorizing future automatic government spending.

Several House Republicans voted against legislation this month that granted back pay to federal workers affected by the shutdown. Those conservatives, including Rep. Thomas MassieThomas Harold MassieO'Rourke gun confiscation talk alarms Democrats Scalise blasts Democratic legislation on gun reforms Airports already have plenty of infrastructure funding MORE (R-Ky.), had concerns about the impact of a provision in the bill automatically granting back pay after all future shutdowns.

“Congressman Massie is not a fan of putting the government on autopilot,” spokeswoman Laura Lington said.

While many other lawmakers support the idea of legislatively preventing future shutdowns, Rep. Gerry ConnollyGerald (Gerry) Edward ConnollyA dozen House Democrats call on EU ambassador to resign amid Ukraine scandal House questions Volker as impeachment probe ramps up Democrats probing whether groups booked Trump hotel rooms to earn president's favor: report MORE (D-Va.) said he doesn’t endorse the provision proposed by Warner to withhold funding for members of Congress, their staffs and the president’s office, even though he supports the underlying bill.

“While I understand the thought and sentiment behind it, I don’t think any good comes from defunding any part of the government,” Connolly, whose Northern Virginia district is home to thousands of federal workers, told The Hill. “I do not support efforts to deny Congress its funding. I think no good comes from that.”

Connolly is also the author of a bill set for a House floor vote this week to ensure a pay increase for federal civilian workers equal to the 2.6 percent raise allotted for members of the military. Trump had announced a civilian workforce pay freeze for 2019 in late December after the shutdown began.

Connolly is pushing for both the civilian workforce pay parity and shutdown prevention measures to be included in any final funding deal. He said he hopes the shutdown helps provide momentum for efforts to help federal workers as conferees begin meeting this week to try to hash out a long-term deal, whether it be pay parity or simply not missing out on paychecks.

“I think there’s a renewed sense of appreciation for public servants and what they do for us,” Connolly said.