Wall Street Journal
By Kristina Peterson and Stephanie Armour
March 20, 2018
Lawmakers hustled Monday to resolve policy disputes holding up an agreement on a sweeping spending bill needed to keep the government funded beyond Friday, but negotiations stretched into early Tuesday morning.
Disagreements over health-care policy, immigration and funding for a New York rail tunnel project persisted as Democrats, Republicans and the White House negotiated the measure that would keep the government open until October and prevent a partial shutdown when its current funding expires at 12:01 a.m. Saturday.
Congress and President Donald Trump had already agreed to the overall spending levels last month, as part of a two-year budget deal, and senior lawmakers were confident it would pass before week’s end.
As part of the budget deal, the bill will boost defense spending by $80 billion this fiscal year over spending limits set in 2011, although Congress has regularly agreed to lift federal funding since then. Domestic spending would get a $63 billion increase.
A bipartisan congressional effort to shore up the Affordable Care Act was likely to be excluded from the bill, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) told House Republicans Monday evening, although Senate Republicans had been pushing late Monday to get it in the legislation.
Sens. Lamar Alexander (R., Tenn.) and Susan Collins (R., Maine) had hoped to include a plan from Mr. Alexander and Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.) to restore payments to insurers that offset their costs for providing mandatory subsidies to some low-income consumers on the ACA. Mr. Trump ended those payments last year, and many insurers raised premiums as a result. That meant people who don’t get federal assistance to help with premiums saw their costs rise.
The health-care package also would have provided money to states for reinsurance, which help cover high-cost insurer claims as a way to reduce overall premiums. And it would have given states greater flexibility with waivers on how they implement the ACA. Its omission would deal a major blow to insurers and could further imperil the ailing health law’s markets.
Democrats objected to a requirement from Republicans that would have only allowed subsidies to go to insurers that don’t provide any coverage for abortions. Current law prevents federal funding from covering abortions, but doesn’t stop insurers from providing separate coverage for them.
In an unusual move, Republicans publicly released their proposal Monday afternoon, criticizing Democrats for blocking it over the abortion restrictions.
“What we’ve come up with is not going to be a major change in policy in any way,” said Ms. Collins, pointing to her voting record in support of abortion rights.
But Democrats said the proposal expanded abortion restrictions in ways they couldn’t support. “I’m not going to do anything that appears to further retreat from our commitment to choice,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D., Conn.), who added that he would vote against the bill if that restriction was included.
A partisan impasse also looked likely to block any extension of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. Mr. Trump ended the program, which shields young undocumented immigrants from deportation, in September and gave Congress until early March to pass a replacement.
On Sunday, the White House proposed extending the program for those enrolled in it now for 2½ years if paired with $25 billion to build a wall along the border with Mexico. Democrats were willing to support the $25 billion for the border wall, but wanted the agreement to include a path to citizenship, and wanted it to cover both those in the DACA program now and those eligible under its rules, according to two people familiar with the negotiations. The White House objected, leaving the issue at an impasse.
Federal judges have blocked the administration from winding down the DACA program for now, easing pressure on lawmakers to reach an immediate deal.
The Democrats’ proposal found some support in conservative circles. Three political groups funded by the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch issued statements in support of a border security for citizenship trade that Democrats proposed.
“That’s an offer all parties should immediately accept,” said Brent Gardner, chief government affairs officer for Americans for Prosperity. Supportive statements also came from Koch-backed Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce and the Libre Initiative. The Libre Initiative is also funding digital advertising campaign urging action on the Dreamer issue as part of the omnibus spending deal.
Lawmakers were still negotiating Monday over funding levels for the Homeland Security Department and how they should be allocated. Rep. John Carter (R., Texas), chairman of the House Appropriations Homeland Security subcommittee, said he was pushing for $1.6 billion for the border wall, but that remained under discussion Monday night.
Lawmakers said Monday night that no deal had been struck yet over whether the spending bill should include $900 million in funding for a tunnel under the Hudson River.
Advocates have said the tunnel is needed to strengthen commuter rail service on the heavily traveled northeast corridor. Mr. Trump has threatened to veto the bill over the funds and administration officials have said it is the type of project that they would ask states and cities to fund themselves.
Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R., Texas) said he was hopeful the spending bill would include a measure he has championed to strengthen compliance with the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS. The “Fix NICS” bill is supported by 73 senators, but has some GOP opposition. Democrats have also pushed to hold votes on other gun-related legislation.
“I just can’t imagine why it wouldn’t be [included] unless people are being just stubborn,” Mr. Cornyn said Monday afternoon.
Lawmakers and aides had hoped to unveil the spending bill late Monday night, setting up a vote in the House on Wednesday and in the Senate later in the week, but hadn’t completed the bill by midnight. That is likely to put more time pressure on lawmakers later this week.
The compressed time frame could pose problems in the Senate, where any one senator can prevent the chamber from speeding up its time-consuming procedures, as Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.) did last month, triggering a brief government shutdown. It wasn’t clear Monday whether Mr. Paul might act similarly this week.
For more information, go to: www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment