SPENDING BATTLE LINES DRAWN – PREPARE FOR ANOTHER CULTURE WAR House Republicans are back in session later Tuesday with a big task ahead: deciding how many hot-button social issues to take up as they bring their first two spending bills of the season to the floor. The Rules Committee will decide on Tuesday which amendments lawmakers will vote on out of a lengthy list of incendiary topics. It’s further proof, if you needed it, that there’s now no legislation so straightforward that it can avoid getting tied to culture war fights. Reminder: The first two bills heading to the House floor deal with military, veterans and agriculture — none of which are typically a magnet for controversy. Let’s run through the thorniest amendment proposals that the Rules panel will vet as it takes up the military and veterans spending bill:
- Abortion: Democrats have pitched several attempts to ax GOP provisions in the bill that would restrict access to abortion. Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.), on the other hand, wants to take the bill further by preventing Department of Veterans Affairs money from being used for abortions even if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest.
- Mask mandates: Reps. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) and Keith Self (R-Texas) want to bar the enforcement of any Covid-related mask mandate, while Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) has proposed banning masks in nonsurgical areas of VA facilities.
- Marijuana access: There’s a bipartisan measure aimed at ensuring veterans can participate in medical cannabis programs, while a Democratic-led amendment would block federal job applicants from being tested for marijuana in states where it’s legal.
- LGBT issues: Several Democratic-led efforts would strike language in the bill that bars “funding for surgical procedures or hormone therapies for the purposes of gender affirming care.” Rosendale also has proposed barring the promotion of “any adult cabaret performances or LGBTQ events” with taxpayer money.
- Gender diversity: Boebert has an amendment that would block the use of government funds for “managing gender diversity” at the VA.
Why this matters: It’s a foreboding omen for the rest of the spending bills that Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s majority wants to approve ahead of the Sept. 30 government shutdown deadline. If McCarthy’s right flank manages to turn what’s historically been an uncomplicated spending bill into a quagmire of hot-button votes, the House can expect even more political toxicity during debate on higher-profile spending bills that have to move in September. Another preview: House Freedom Caucus member Chip Roy (R-Texas), who sits on the influential Rules Committee, offered six priorities he’d want to see met for him to “consider funding [the] federal government” (italics ours). That follows a warning we gave you last week from another member of the hardline Freedom Caucus, Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.). He cautioned GOP leadership about forging ahead with individual spending bills without agreement on deep cuts across federal agencies. McCarthy controls only a five-seat majority, meaning that a small handful of Freedom Caucus members could singlehandedly derail the GOP’s spending-bill train. Reality check: Most of the social policy restrictions in these spending bill are highly unlikely to survive the Democratic-led Senate, let alone President Joe Biden’s veto pen. The Rules Committee is due to meet Tuesday at 3 p.m. on the Military Construction-VA legislation. The hearing is likely to run late into the night, but there’s no rest for the weary: The committee is scheduled to meet Wednesday to consider proposed amendments for the Agriculture-FDA appropriations bill, which GOP leadership would also like to move this week. Across the rotunda: The Senate will continue to churn through its annual defense policy bill, which Majority Leader Chuck Schumer hopes to wrap up before breaking for August recess. To that end, senators will vote on two amendments Tuesday — one blocking China, Russia, Iran and North Korea from buying U.S. farmland; and another requiring American firms to notify the federal government when they invest in certain Chinese tech industries.
| 
No comments:
Post a Comment