The House and Senate are out this week as they head home to celebrate Memorial Day with a week-long recess. When they return, the Senate will resume consideration on its version of the FY 2017 National Defense Authorization Act and the House will begin regrouping on how to proceed with appropriations after the meltdown of the FY 2017 E&W bill last week.
Category: On the Hill
House and Senate Agree to Conference Zika Funding Bills
Today, the House voted 233-180 Thursday for a rule that would allow the chamber go to conference with the Senate over differences in the two chambers’ respective versions of their FY2017 Mil-Con appropriations measures as well as legislation to address the Zika virus. The Senate will also need to agree to go to conference.
The House and Senate has vastly different approaches to Zika funding. The House funding was a separate measure, which only provided $622 million and passed on a largely party-line vote of 241-184 while garnering a veto threat from President Obama because it provides less than a third of his $1.9 billion request. The Senate included $1.1 billion, again less than the $1.9 billion requested, and was attached to the Senate’s FY2017 Mil-Con and T-HUD combined measure.
Once convened the House and Senate have a limited amount of time to resolve their differences.
House FY2016 E&W Fails on the Floor
Earlier today, House’s FY2017 Energy and Water Appropriations bill (HR 5055) failed by a vote of 112-305. It is the second regular appropriations bill to be considered by the House this year. The first was the FY2017 Mil-Con measure, which passed last week.
The measure failed to pass due to a series of amendments that poisoned the bill for both Republicans and Democrats. For the Democrats, there were a host of provisions added that dealt illegal immigration “sanctuary cities” and the Iran nuclear deal among others. Additionally, the President had previously issued a veto threat on the measure over several policy riders, including ones that ease protections for an endangered fish to allow more water to be diverted within drought-stricken California as well as provisions to prevent implementation of Clean Water Act regulations..
The damning amendment for conservative Republicans was an added last night by Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-NY) and passed by a vote of 223-195, which would bar federal contractors from discriminating against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.The Maloney amendment was first offered on the House FY2017 Mil-Con bill, which appeared to pass 217-206, but ultimately was defeated after the Leadership’s effort switched enough Republican votes to defeat the measure, 212-213. Many House Republicans opposed the amendment because it would have the effect of enacting into law a 2014 Executive Order by President Barack Obama.
Upon the amendment’s failure on the FY2017 Mil-Con bill, Rep. Maloney insisted he would continue to offer the amendment, or similar to each subsequent appropriations measure. This position lead to the House Republicans changing their tactics on future appropriations considered on the Floor, but not until after the HR5055, the FY2017 E&W bill was already on the Floor for consideration.
Ultimately, just 106 Republicans voted in favor of the bill, while 130 voted against it. There were only six Democratic votes in favor as well, with 175 opposed.
With the failure of the bill, the House recessed for the Memorial Day Recess period.
House Passes Amended Senate Energy Policy Bill
Yesterday, the House passed, by a vote of 241-178, an amended Senate legislative package (S. 2012) containing its broad energy policy overhaul. The Senate, which passed a more bipartisan bill, expressed concern about several of the many contentious elements the House added. The House included several controversial provisions including it’s stalled version to reauthorize America COMPETES.
The next step for the House’s energy bill is a conference with the Senate’s version of the legislation.
New House Rules
Speaker Ryan proposed to the regular Republican House Conference meeting new procedures on proposing amendments for legislation, and specifically appropriations bills. The new process requires Members to “notice” their amendments by submitting them for publication in the Congressional Record in advance of consideration on the House Floor in order to have them considered by the full House. The move effectively negates the “open rule” means of considering appropriations bills, which is the historical means of consideration of appropriations bills, and moves it to a modified open rule.
Return to the open rule process, which is admittedly somewhat of a melee, is something that newly-minted Speaker Boehner returned to as a means of Congress “returning to regular order”.
For each bill considered on the House Floor, the House Rules Committee determines how the bill will be considered (open rule, modified open rule, structured rule, or closed rule). Most House legislation is considered under a structured rule, which requires a Member to file their amendments with the House Rules Committee, and the committee determines which amendments will be considered.
Per tradition, the House considers appropriations legislation under an open rule, which means that any Member may offer any amendment that complies with the standing rules of the House (meaning it is germane, and respects and Budgetary constraints, like needing offsets) and the amendment will be debated for 5 minutes.
In practice, the open rule means that any Member of Congress can offer any amendment (germane or not, offset or not) as long as they are on the House floor to offer that amendment while the Clerk is reading the relevant section of the bill. There is no requirement to let any of their House colleagues know of their intent to offer an amendment nor what the amendment will do in anyway. This means that the consideration of House appropriations bills can be lengthy (multiple days long) and volumous (each day can wrap up between midnight and 3 am).
The shift in how appropriations bills are considered is a direct result of Democratic efforts to embarrass or cause image problems for House Republicans. The most recent example of this was the nearly-passed LBGT amendment to the FY2017 Veterans Affairs appropriations bill which would enforce an Executive Order prohibiting federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The amendment was set to pass with 217 votes in favor. However, House GOP leadership could be seen on the Floor persuading Republicans to change their votes to sink Maloney’s measure. The vote was held open for seven minutes until the amendment failed on a 212-213 vote.
The House endured similar embarrassment last year with the FY2016 Interior bill, as an amendment passed that would restrict the display of the Confederate flag in certain national cemeteries. That amendment passed late at night by voice vote and was vehemently opposed by many in the Southern-GOP delegation. Ultimately, the House never finished considering that bill and all other appropriations bills rather than risk their members taking potentially damming votes. Democrats had vowed to offer the amendment to ever other appropriations bill.
House Republicans will continue to try and play offense, rather than defense, as the appropriations process, hopefully, continues to move forward.
Open Rules: Under an open rule, any Member may offer an amendment that complies with the standing rules of the House and the Budget Act. Also included in the category of open rules are those special rules that are often referred to as ‘‘open plus.’’ These rules allow the offering of any amendment normally in order under an open rule plus the consideration of any amendments for which waivers of points of order have been granted by the special rule.
Modified Open Rules: This type of rule permits only amendments preprinted in the Congressional Record, puts a time-cap on consideration of amendments, or does both.
Structured Rules: This type of rule limits the amendments that may be offered to only those amendments designated in the special rule.
Closed Rules: Under a Closed Rule no amendments may be offered other than amendments recommended by the committee reporting the bill. However, the Rules Committee is prohibited under the rules of the House from reporting a special rule providing for consideration of a bill or joint resolution that denies the minority the right to offer amendatory instructions in a motion to recommit.