As lawmakers rush toward the next shutdown deadline, a debate within the Republican Party rages over whether to release government funds into the new year.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) said this week that lawmakers are running out of time before the Dec. 20 deadline, and that passing an extension until early 2025 would benefit Republicans and President-elect Trump. In the end, it's a good choice.” “Please explain a little more about what those expenses are.”
However, the proposal has not received support from the entire conference due to concerns from defense hawks and the party's spending negotiators.
“We have to break this cycle, but carrying this into next year is bad,” House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said Tuesday. “It's not fair to the new president and it's not fair to the new members. They're going to have to vote on this. I don't like any of it and I'd like to get the bill done.”
Meanwhile, top Democrats have also expressed a strong desire to complete the fiscal year 2025 funding work by December 20, with Representative Rosa DeLauro (Connecticut), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, saying, He declined to say whether he or the Democratic Party supported it. Continuing Resolution (CR) in case funding negotiations fail.
“My job is to fight like hell to get it there by December 20th,” she said.
And although Mr. Trump himself has not said publicly what he prefers, this opinion will almost certainly be overwhelmingly influential among Republicans in Congress.
If the three-month stopgap bill passes, it would prolong the funding battle until Republicans control the House, Senate and White House. But Republicans also warn that even bigger items will be added to the long to-do list for the first 100 days of the next Congress.
“We want to get our job done,” Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), one of the 12 spending cardinals on the Finance Committee, said Tuesday. But he also noted that “time is running out” for Congress to quickly develop a funding plan for next year before the final stopgap funding.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) also said Tuesday that he “doesn't really like” the stopgap idea, but Ken, chairman of the subcommittee that oversees annual defense funding, Congressman Calvert (R-Calif.) said: He said he hoped lawmakers would “get the job done before the next Congress.”
“That's bad for the Department of Defense. It costs about $2 billion a month to operate under this system. [continuing resolution] There is no fresh start, contracts are expiring and inefficiencies within the department are increasing. So that's not a good way to operate. ”
In contrast, hard-line conservatives have been calling for a CR until March for months, wary of a huge spending package being squeezed in for the holiday season.
Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), head of the House Freedom Caucus and spending cardinal, said in comments to reporters this week that he still “absolutely” supports the funding effort. “I added my hope that they will make SAVE a reality,” he added. [Safeguard American Voter Eligibility] Get back to it and act on it. ”
Republicans had pushed to pass the citizenship-certification voting bill as part of their original plan to avoid a September shutdown, which would have pushed the deadline for the next legislative shutdown to next year. The vote comes amid pushback from conservatives who oppose relying on stopgap funding and concerns from defense hawks about what the plan means for the Pentagon and others in the party. It was held in
The House ultimately passed a so-called clean three-month stopgap to keep the government open beyond September, but not without Democratic support.
Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) said this week that “Democratic votes recently raised the debt ceiling, which was necessary to avoid default and was necessary to avoid several government shutdowns. ” he said.
“So if they're willing to work on a bit of a bipartisan basis, we know we're not…the majority. We can get things done, but , if they want a partisan bill, they have to do it themselves, and they have not shown the ability to do it.”
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said Tuesday that he supports a “paramount” agreement with the top members of the House and Senate funding committees who sit with them to hammer out an agreement that is consistent with bipartisan fiscal policy. ” Liability law. ”
“We've already decided what the maximum spending amount should be for both fiscal years 2024 and 2025, so there shouldn't be any drama. We'll just sit back and let House Republicans and We just need to proceed in a way that is consistent with the wishes of the members of Congress, which Senate Republicans have already agreed to do,” he told The Hill.
But the two chambers have filed vastly different funding bills for fiscal year 2025, with Democrats accusing Republicans of leaving billions of dollars unfunded for non-defense programs in the House-authored plan.
Mr. DeLauro also said he was consulting with Mr. Kohl, as well as Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee.
DeLauro said he was “hoping that the chairman can be persuaded” to reach a long-term agreement by Dec. 20. We must have willing partners. ”
Mychael Schnell and Mike Lillis contributed.
