Dem
51
GOP
49
As we noted yesterday, the Republicans are engaging in a little friendly fratricide. Another episode relates to the omnibus budget bill, driven by Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Committee. He is an old-style conservative who prides himself on getting things done. In particular, before he retires from the Senate on Jan. 3, he wants to get a spending bill though to fund the government. That is part of his job. But he has been under massive fire from other Republicans to not do his job. They are calling him a RINO and a sellout (because he worked with chair Pat Leahy, D-VT, to put together a spending bill). The Republicans want the government to shut down at the end of this week to show who's in charge (short answer: no one). It's not a beautiful swan song for the longest-serving senator from Alabama ever (36 years). His only consolation is that he will be succeeded in the Senate by his former chief of staff, Sen.-elect Katie Britt (R-AL). There is no reason to believe that the people who don't like him will like her any better.
He isn't upset about all the flak he is taking from other Republicans. He knows it comes with the territory. He thinks he is doing what is best for the country and, at the same time, he is saving the House Republicans from themselves by preventing months of infighting next year over funding priorities. He said: "If we're successful, we'll have probably done them a favor. There probably won't be much thanks for it." What he means is that by preventing a government shutdown this week, he is also preventing the Republicans from getting blamed for it. Some people are saying the appropriations bill he and Leahy are working on is his monument. He replied to that by saying: "I don't want a monument. Monuments are for pigeons and dogs."
Although Shelby is taking a lot of friendly (?) fire from House Republicans, he is getting some support from his own chamber. The always-concerned Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said that the brickbats flying in Shelby's direction were "very unfortunate." For once, her concern is fully justified. She will take over his job as ranking member of the Appropriations Committee in January, and then the missiles launched by the House will be aimed at her.
Note also that you should not discount the possibility that a lot of the carping directed at Shelby is actually just political theater. For example, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) has been one of the loudest voices demanding that no deal should be cut. But is that really what McCarthy wants? He's already being stretched to the limits of his political skill (and perhaps beyond) just trying to lay hands on the Speaker's gavel. Does he really want to layer a fight over the budget on top of that? Not if he's smart, or even if he's of just average intelligence. If Shelby can hammer something out, then McCarthy can whine and moan about RINO Republicans, and yet avoid a massive political headache that he's probably not capable of managing.
As an aside, Shelby started out as a Democrat but switched to the Republicans in 1994—the day after the Republicans got the Senate majority. That is somewhat relevant now since another senator, Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), also left the Democrats, albeit to become an independent, not a Republican. Historically, most party switchers don't do well, but Shelby is a counterexample. He was accepted by the Alabama voters as a Republican and won five elections as a Republican after switching, eventually rising to become the top Republican on the very-important Appropriations Committee, which decides (together with the House Committee on Appropriations) how the government will spend its money. So there can be life after switching.
Anyway, despite the opposition, Shelby and Leahy finally produced a 4,155-page bill, released yesterday, that would fund the government to the tune of $1.66 trillion for another year. They hope the Senate will pass it by Thursday and send it over to the House in time to avert a government shutdown. Getting it through the House is straightforward though because no Republican votes are needed if all the Democrats vote for it.
The bill contains $858 billion for defense/military, including $119 billion for veterans' care, a 22% increase over last year. Also in there is $45 billion for military aid to Ukraine, more than the $37 billion Joe Biden asked for. Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who will be visiting Washington today, is undoubtedly pleased; the entire GDP of Ukraine is just $200 billion. There is also a 5% boost for domestic programs, less than inflation, but something both parties grudgingly agreed to. Democrats can say: "Hey, we got more money for domestic programs." Republicans can say: "In real (inflation-corrected terms), we cut domestic spending." See, everyone is happy!
The bill also contains a lot of stuff unrelated to spending, including an update to the 1887 Electoral College Act, something both parties actually want, albeit for different reasons. It also states that a certificate of ascertainment, which identifies a state's presidential electors, must be signed by the governor. It also states that the President of the Senate may not object to electoral votes from any state. Not part of her job description. Objections can only be lodged when the requisite number of members of Congress object. The Senate bill puts that at one-fifth of each chamber; the House bill puts that at one-third. Our staff mathematician bought the wrong kind of egg nog, and so was available to crunch the numbers on his old calculator. He suggested four-fifteenths of each chamber as a compromise. Fifteenths are important and rarely get the attention they deserve. A distant second choice would be one-quarter of each chamber. In practice, finding 109 crazy House members is easy but finding 25 crazy senators is vastly more difficult.
Also in there are provisions relating to:
In short, it is the usual Christmas tree decorated with shiny ornaments. One ornament that didn't make it to the tree is the cannabis banking bill, which would have allowed banks to service marijuana dealers without breaking the law. Since the sale of Mary Jane is illegal under federal law, no bank will open an account for stores selling the illegal weed, forcing them to operate entirely in cash, with the danger of being robbed and more. Another one that is in there but might yet be killed is 4,000 visas for Afghans who worked for the U.S. military in Afghanistan as translators, drivers, etc. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) wants that item killed.
However, there is one battle still to be fought. It is the question of where the new $500 million FBI headquarters is to be built. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) would like it in Maryland, either in Greenbelt or Landover. Virginia Democrats think that Springfield, VA, would be a better choice. The bill wouldn't actually make a choice, but it could rejigger the requirements to favor one state over the other. Republicans don't care and say it is a "Dem-on-Dem" fight.
Most Senate Republicans are expected to vote against the bill, but if 10 of them vote for cloture, no Republican votes for the bill itself are needed, assuming President of the Senate Kamala Harris is available to break the expected tie on the bill proper. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) supports the bill, which gives the 10 Republican senators cover to vote for cloture. Remember that five Republican senators are retiring in January and so don't have to worry about the consequences of voting for cloture. They are, besides Shelby, Roy Blunt (MO), Richard Burr (NC), Rob Portman (OH), and Pat Toomey (PA). So only five more are needed. With McConnell on board, Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD) and Conference Chair John Barasso (R-WY) are surely fine with it as well, so only two more are needed.
Late in the day on Tuesday, the Senate voted 70-25 to advance the bill to the floor for debate. Some of those 70 want to add amendments, and could become "nay" votes if their pet project is rejected. However, it certainly looks like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has plenty of margin for error. We'll know within the next day or so. (V)