House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) had the first move in setting 2024 spending levels for the federal government. Spending bills generally originate in the House, just as white gets the first move in chess. That’s a great advantage.
Chess players call it tempo. Athletes refer to it as momentum. Warfighters call it the initiative. The one who makes the first move has an opportunity to control the pace of the game.
But that advantage can be lost. And Mr. McCarthy appears to have lost the tempo in the 2024 appropriations battle.
While House Republicans dallied last week, failing twice to bring one of their own spending bills to the floor, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) cobbled together a bipartisan measure to keep the government funded.
House Slogs Along
Mr. McCarthy gained early momentum by passing the Limit, Save, Grow Act in April, which forced President Joe Biden to negotiate over the debt ceiling. Those negotiations resulted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act, a bipartisan bill that passed both chambers and was signed by the president in June.Since then, the House has slogged along, hampered by infighting among Republicans over procedural matters and the size of spending cuts they'll accept.
Mr. McCarthy scored a victory on Sept. 26 by passing a procedural vote to finally allow debate on four appropriations bills: the Department of Homeland Security at $91.5 billion, the Department of State at $52.5 billion, the Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration at $25.3 billion, and the Department of Defense at $886.3 billion.
Together with the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs bill already approved by the House, those bills, if passed, would represent about 75 percent of all federal discretionary spending.
However, to take effect, the bills must be passed by the House, approved by the Senate, and signed by the president—none of which has happened yet.
Debate on the Agriculture bill began almost immediately after the procedural vote and continued into the wee hours of the morning. At 9 a.m., the House reconvened to debate on the Defense bill, which continued for six hours.
Mr. McCarthy told reporters on Sept. 26 that he expected consideration of those bills to be concluded by Sept. 28 and that he would field a continuing resolution to keep the government open for another month by Sept. 29, the day before the money runs out.
All of that might have produced more leverage if accomplished a week earlier. As it stands, Mr. Schumer is poised to seize the initiative.
Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), who chairs the Main Street Caucus, acknowledged the setback in remarks to reporters on Sept. 27.
Schumer’s Play
Mr. Schumer’s move was to attach stop-gap funding provisions to a bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration.The measure would extend government funding through Nov. 17 at current spending levels, allowing six additional weeks to complete the 2024 appropriations process. The bill would also add $6.15 billion in funding for Ukraine and $5.99 billion for disaster relief.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the bill was “meticulously negotiated” to gain bipartisan support. That worked, as 77 senators, including 26 Republicans, voted to keep it moving through the Senate’s laborious legislative process.
Mr. Schumer has said that the bill will come to the Senate floor on Sept. 28, where he all but guaranteed it'll pass.
Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), chair of the House Democratic Caucus, estimated that the measure would get at least 315 votes if brought to the floor in the House.
If the Senate does pass their temporary funding bill, Mr. McCarthy will have to decide whether to present that plan to the House or to forge ahead with his own process, which has so far produced nothing to avert a government shutdown.
Mr. Schumer called on Mr. McCarthy to follow the Senate’s lead.
Republican CR
Mr. McCarthy tried to pass a continuing resolution (CR) once before. H.R. 5525, the Continuing Appropriations and Border Security Enhancement Act, was drafted by a coalition of Republican members from the House Freedom and Main Street caucuses. They introduced the bill on Sept. 17, and Mr. McCarthy supported it.But he withdrew the bill on Sept. 19 amid opposition from fiscal hawks in his own party.
The measure would have funded the government through Oct. 31 but imposed an overall 8 percent cut in nondefense discretionary spending. The bill also incorporated nearly all of H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023, which was passed by the House but not considered by the Senate.
GOP Unrest
Mr. McCarthy faced new challenges on Sept. 27 from both moderate and very conservative members of the Republican caucus.The Problem Solvers Caucus, which includes both Republicans and Democrats, released a plan to fund the government on a temporary basis and complete the appropriations process by Jan. 11, 2024.
Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.), a fiscal hardliner who has strenuously opposed continuing resolutions, said he would vote against a CR even if it includes provisions to strengthen border protection. Mr. Burchett also said he would consider supporting a vote to vacate the chair if Mr. McCarthy were to work with Democrats to pass a CR.
Mr. Burchett and others have insisted that the House follow regular order in considering spending bills one at a time, including debate and the opportunity to offer amendments, to avoid being forced to approve large, catch-all appropriations bills.
“Here we are, backed up to a shutdown. And [we had the] whole month of August. You know, it’s funny, Sept. 30 comes around about this time every year,” Mr. Burchett told NTD, sister media to The Epoch Times.
“We should have been prepared for it.”
Most House Republicans appear to remain committed to Mr. McCarthy’s leadership, and many acknowledge the frustration of members, including Mr. Burchett, who have pushed for procedural changes during the appropriations process.
“People who have concerns with CRs don’t want to invest in business as usual. And frankly, I share their value that too often CRs have been used as a crutch to enable irresponsible spending,” Mr. Johnson told The Epoch Times.
Yet he remains optimistic about bringing House Republicans together to advance a conservative spending plan.
“I do think there are members who have opposed CRs in the past who, if they see that we’re going through a responsible and fiscally conservative process, we'll understand that a stop-gap funding measure could be helpful in that process,” Mr. Johnson said.
