Latest news with #appropriations
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Bipartisan government funding is at risk of dying in Trump's Washington
WASHINGTON — For many years, final decisions over how much the U.S. government spends, and how, have required sign-off from leaders of both parties, no matter who controlled the White House or Capitol Hill or the level of polarization. Now, that last vestige of the bipartisan funding process is at risk of dying after a one-two punch by President Donald Trump and the Republican-led Congress. The 'appropriations' process, whereby both parties pass detailed funding bills for various federal agencies every year, has been in a slow decline for decades. But recent moves by the Trump-era GOP to disrupt past funding agreements have accelerated that decline — and, in the view of Democrats and even some weary Republicans, undermined Congress' power of the purse in deference to the White House. First, Republicans passed a $300 billion hike in military spending and immigration enforcement as part of Trump's megabill; and second, they cut $9 billion in domestic money and foreign aid under a rarely used 'rescission' process, allowing the GOP to cancel already approved bipartisan spending with a party-line vote. A Sept. 30 deadline to fund the government or risk a shutdown will test whether a bipartisan deal is still possible, particularly as Trump's top budget aide publicly calls for a more partisan approach. House Republicans have undermined the bipartisan path for years by slamming the resulting deals as 'swamp' creations by a 'uniparty' that is addicted to spending. Now, GOP lawmakers in both chambers are going it alone, suggesting they'll bring more rescissions packages to undo past bipartisan spending agreements because the existing process is failing. 'We don't have an appropriations process. It's broken. It's been broken for a while,' said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee. He said Congress will likely fall back on continuing resolutions, which largely maintain the status quo, and rescission packages for the remainder of Trump's presidency. Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a senior appropriator, said the once-respected government funding process has 'disappeared,' calling the latest rescissions package 'a step backwards.' 'It's basically saying: No matter what you decide on, the president is going to be able to change the bill, even for money that's been appropriated,' Durbin said. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, R-Maine, insist the process is alive and well. They will test that theory this week as Thune plans to bring at least one — if not more — appropriations bills to the Senate floor. He has argued that the $9 billion cut hits a tiny portion of the federal budget and shouldn't dissuade Democrats from working toward a deal. 'I would hope, at least for the functioning of our government, that they would be willing to work with us on some things,' Thune said Wednesday on Fox News. 'They haven't been so far.' But even some GOP proponents of the bill admit it adds to the challenges. 'The rescission package — of course, I understand that could complicate things,' said Rep. Robert Aderholt of Alabama, a senior Republican on the House Appropriations Committee. Vought weighs in Just after the Senate overcame objections in both parties to approve the $9 billion spending-cut bill requested by Trump, a comment from White House budget director Russell Vought dropped like a bomb on Capitol Hill. 'The appropriations process has to be less bipartisan,' Vought told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast Thursday. 'It's not going to keep me up at night, and I think will lead to better results, by having the appropriations process be a little bit partisan.' He added that more rescission packages would be coming. The backlash was fierce. Senate Republicans responsible for crafting the government funding bills were taken aback by his candor. 'Mr. Vought's lack of respect and apparent lack of understanding of how Congress operates is baffling, because he's served in government before,' Collins told NBC News. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said Vought 'disrespects' the appropriations process in Congress with his 'dismissive' comments. 'I think he thinks that we are irrelevant,' she said. And Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Thursday called on Trump to 'fire Russell Vought immediately, before he destroys our democracy and runs the country into the ground.' The series of clashes escalates tensions leading up to the fall deadline, with top Democrats warning ahead of the vote that they would have little incentive to provide the 60 votes to cut a deal. 'It is absurd to expect Democrats to play along with funding the government if Republicans are just going to renege on a bipartisan agreement by concocting rescissions packages behind closed doors that can pass with only their votes,' Schumer warned in a recent speech. The debate over the demise of individual lawmakers getting to dictate where federal funding is allocated came to a head during a recent meeting of the Senate Appropriations Committee, with many senators arguing that the work they were doing in that moment may just be overridden by congressional leadership and the president. 'The one thing we all agree on is the appropriations process is broken,' former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., lamented, describing how during his 18 years leading the GOP conference he helped oversee a shift away from government funding levels being decided by committees and instead being negotiated by only the highest levels of leadership and the White House. 'I concluded our failure to pass our bills empower every president, regardless of party, because I've been in those discussions at the end, the big four and the guy with the pen, and that makes all of our requests irrelevant,' McConnell said. Collins has repeatedly blamed the decline of the process on Schumer's refusal to put appropriations bills on the Senate floor. That has also been a slow-moving trend: McConnell and former Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., also short-circuited the process on the floor when in charge. Rising partisanship has weakened committees broadly and placed more power in the hands of leadership. In the context of government funding, that led to 'omnibus' spending bills and continuing resolutions — or CRs — negotiated by party leaders and jammed through Congress, often with an impending deadline to pressure holdouts to fall in line quickly. But House Republicans raised hell, torching the massive bills negotiated behind closed doors as a betrayal to their constituents. In recent years, they have successfully steered their leadership away from that approach. And it leaves few options going forward. 'What the math tells us' Durbin, who is retiring after a 30-year Senate career, reminisced about when the process was at the peak of its powers — last century. The last time Congress completed it through 'regular order' was in the 1990s. 'There was a time when we called 12 appropriation bills to the floor, open for amendment! Can you imagine that?' Durbin said. 'I remember. And you had to do your job in the committee. You had to have a subcommittee lined up on a bipartisan basis, a full committee lined up on a bipartisan basis. And the committee stood together. And you could find enough to support it to pass something. That, I think, really reflected the best of the Senate.' He attributed the change to the growing discord between the parties and the declining 'reputation of the Appropriations Committee,' although he credited Collins and Vice Chair Patty Murray, D-Wash., with trying to restore the bipartisan spirit of the panel. Collins, notably, is on an island as the only GOP senator who voted against both attempts to rewrite government funding — in the megabill and rescissions package. Collins is also up for re-election next year in a Democratic-leaning state that Trump lost in 2024. Sarah Binder, a political scientist at George Washington University and the Brookings Institution, said the megabill's changes to GOP spending priorities 'undermines the rough parity between defense and nondefense discretionary spending that until recently made bipartisan deals possible.' She added, 'The Trump OMB's aggressive impoundments of enacted appropriations severely threatens Congress' power of the purse and with it the authority and expertise of and oversight by appropriators.' Yet even as Republicans find new ways to go around the Senate's 60-vote threshold, Thune has promised he won't abolish the filibuster. He distanced himself from Vought's remarks. 'Well, that runs contrary to what the math tells us around here,' he said. 'So, we need 60 on approps bills. And it's going to take 60 to fund the government.' The path to a new funding law is murky, at best. And Collins, for now, maintains confidence in the bipartisan appropriations process. When asked if she has any concerns about its future, Collins told NBC News, 'None whatsoever.' This article was originally published on
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Murkowski: Vought ‘disrespects' the government funding process
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) on Thursday said she thinks White House budget chief Russell Vought 'disrespects' Congress's annual funding process after he said it should be 'less bipartisan.' 'I think he disrespects it,' Murkowski said. 'I think he thinks that we are irrelevant, and I wish I had actually heard the speech.' Vought drew attention Thursday for remarks he made at an event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor, at which he said 'the appropriations process has to be less bipartisan.' 'There is no voter in the country that went to the polls and said, 'I'm voting for a bipartisan appropriations process,'' he said. 'That may be the view of something that appropriators want to maintain, and I want to have very good relationships with all Republican appropriators.' As for Democratic appropriators, Vought said he's 'willing to work with' them 'if they conduct themselves with decorum.' 'I think it will lead to better results by having the appropriations process be a little bit partisan, and I don't think it's necessarily leading to a shutdown, I think we will be able to get to a good result,' he said, while criticizing how the appropriations process has been carried out in Congress thus far. He also said the power of the purse remains with Congress, but he added, 'It's a ceiling. It is not a floor. It is not the notion that you have to spend every last dollar of that.' 'Two hundred years of presidents had the ability to spend less than appropriations and did,' he argued. 'It was not only precedent, but it was a part of how the original founders understood what they were separating, the powers between the executive and the legislative branch.' Murkowski said later on Thursday that quotes she's seen in coverage of Vought's comments appear 'pretty dismissive of the appropriations process.' She was also asked about the administration's plans to send Congress additional requests for cuts to funding previously approved by lawmakers. Congress is on the verge of passing legislation that cuts roughly $9 billion in foreign aid and public broadcasting funds ahead of a looming Friday deadline. The Senate passed the rescissions package early Thursday morning, with Murkowski voting against it. 'I do not think that should be our path,' Murkowski, a senior GOP appropriator, said. 'It's not legislating. It's basically the White House saying this is what we want you to do. Take it or leave it.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
House advances $832 billion military budget plan for next fiscal year
House lawmakers advanced their $832 billion defense appropriations plan for fiscal 2026 early Friday morning despite strong objections from Democrats over missing budgetary details and social issue fights. The bill's passage — by a 221-209 margin, with only five Democrats backing the measure — sends the national security budget debate over to the Senate, where appropriators still have not unveiled the parameters of their spending plans for next year. The Defense Department is currently operating this fiscal year under a modified continuing resolution, with some additional funding for military programs and purchases. Lawmakers are hopeful that won't happen again next year, but the slow pace of budget work thus far leaves only about six weeks of session work left before a possible partial government shutdown if the appropriations bills aren't finalized. The House spending plan was largely drafted before Pentagon leaders unveiled their detailed budgetary requests for fiscal 2026 just last month. President Donald Trump has touted that outline as a '$1 trillion defense budget,' but that total includes additional one-time funds approved by Congress as part of a separate reconciliation measure. House appropriators OK rebukes to recent DOD scandals in budget bill As such, the House plan for the base defense budget represents a small decrease over current fiscal year military spending, a point that Democrats and some Republican lawmakers have lamented. But Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee's defense panel, praised the funding plan as 'providing our men and women in uniform with the resources they need to keep America safe.' The bill supports a 3.8% pay raise for servicemembers next year, matching the federal formula for the annual prescribed pay boost. It includes $2.6 billion for hypersonics programs and $13 billion for missile defense programs in support of Trump's Golden Dome effort. The measure sets aside $8.5 billion for 69 F-35 fighters, $3.8 billion for B-21 procurement, $2.7 billion for 15 KC-46s and $1.2 billion for four E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft. Another $37 billion would go to Navy shipbuilding efforts, including procurement of one Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine and two Virginia-class fast attack submarines. Under the plan, the Defense Department civilian workforce would be cut by about 45,000 individuals at a savings of $3.6 billion, a provision that drew strong objections from Democratic lawmakers. Critics also attacked the bill's social issue provisions, including language prohibiting military health care facilities from providing abortion services, bans on transgender medical care and surgeries, and elimination of diversity and equity programs. 'These poison pill riders will not go unnoticed by our troops,' said Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., ranking member on the appropriations committee's defense panel. 'They will impact recruitment and retention.' Passage of the defense budget bill was delayed for much of the week by unrelated legislative floor fights in the House, and could be complicated in the Senate by similar, broader fights over federal spending and program cuts. House lawmakers are expected to shift focus in coming days to the annual defense authorization bill — legislation which sets Defense Department policy and spending priorities for the upcoming year, but does not actually appropriate the funds for those goals — but a full floor debate on that measure is unlikely to happen before the chamber's August recess.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Greene knocks Republicans, Democrats after all her defense funding amendments fail
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) blasted her Republican and Democratic colleagues early Friday after all six of her amendments to the House's defense appropriations bill failed. The lower chamber advanced the legislation, which allocates about $832 billion in funding for Department of Defense programs for fiscal 2026 in a vote overnight. Greene's amendment to cut funding for the Israeli Cooperative Program — an agreement through which the U.S. provides Israel $500 million for programs for missile defense — was spiked in a 6-422 vote. The amendment garnered support from GOP Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and a group of progressive Democrats: Reps. Al Green (Texas), Summer Lee (Pa.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). The Georgia Republican's amendment to bar funds in the bill from being used for assistance to Ukraine was also rejected in a 76-353 vote. All 76 lawmakers who backed the amendment were Republicans. 'Tonight all of my amendments to cut $1.6 billion of foreign aid out of our Defense budget failed because both Republicans and Democrats refuse to stop sending your hard earned tax dollars to foreign countries,' Greene wrote in a post on the social platform X. 'For example, $118 million to foreign countries for disaster relief like floods that haven't even happened yet,' the lawmaker added. 'And $15 million for AIDS education activities for soldiers in Africa. I mean can't they figure that out by now? And my amendment to stop sending money to Ukraine. Yep that one failed too.' She warned that the U.S. is '$37 TRILLION in debt and Congress will never ever fix it because they will never ever stop the insane out of control spending that drives inflation up and makes your life unaffordable.' The House passed the overall defense funding bill in a 221-209 vote. Three Republicans opposed it, while five Democrats joined the rest of the GOP lawmakers in getting the bill over the hump. The legislation bolsters funding for active, reserve, and National Guard service members by $6.6 billion over the current funding levels. If signed into law, basic pay for military personnel would increase by 3.8 percent starting next year. The bill also secured $174 billion for procurement and $283 billion for operation and maintenance, among other measures. It marks only the second appropriations bill Republicans have advanced for fiscal 2026, as efforts to pass the now-signed megabill of President Trump's spending and tax priorities took up much of the party's focus in recent months. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
4 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
GOP senators appear to have deal to allow FBI to stay in DC
Senate Republicans believe they now have Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski's (R) support to advance the annual appropriations bill funding the Departments of Commerce and Justice, NASA and the FBI after FBI Director Kash Patel spoke to Murkowski for an hour about the Trump administration's plans to keep the FBI headquarters in Washington, DC. The deal will allow Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) to resume the mark-up of the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2026 on Thursday morning. The spending bill hit a big snag last week after Murkowski voted for an amendment sponsored by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) to block the Trump administration from using funding to relocate the FBI's headquarters, now located at 935 Pennsylvania Avenue in downtown Washington, to anywhere except Greenbelt, Md., the site recommended by the General Services Administration after a multi-year competition between Maryland and Virginia. Murkowski had an hour-long conversation with Patel to go through all of her questions about how the Trump administration got to the decision to relocate the FBI headquarters relocated to the Ronald Reagan Building, which is a few blocks away from the White House, instead of Greenbelt. Murkowski needed clarity to know that the decision was not arbitrary, and to understand better what the process was that went into the announcement to keep the headquarters in DC, according to a person familiar with the behind-the-scenes talks to revive the stalled Commerce, Justice spending bill. The Appropriations Committee will meet on Thursday morning to resume the markup on that bill and also mark up the Military, Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. A senator familiar with the Appropriations Committee's plan is to 'rewind the script' by resuming consideration of the Commerce, Justice spending bill as it was initially approved by the committee before the Van Hollen amendment was adopted. Asked Wednesday afternoon if the controversy over the FBI's headquarters is now 'fixed,' Collins told The Hill: 'I certainly hope so but we'll have to see.'
