Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Pelosi Pushing Democrats to Oppose Latest Spending Bill

Pelosi Pushing Democrats to Oppose Latest Spending Bill

If it works, House GOP basically needs all members on board to vote yes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh5KYxGnFkU#action=share

Senate Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has started to apply pressure on those in her party to oppose the GOP “minibus” spending package that will likely hit the floor on Friday.

The minibus bill has “three appropriation bills: Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.” Rejecting this bill could lead to a shutdown.

From The Washington Examiner:

“The GOP mini-bus package on the Floor this week is partisan, wrong-headed and dangerous,” Pelosi wrote to fellow Democrats.

“House Democrats’ strong opposition to Republicans’ cynical strategy last year gave us powerful leverage in the omnibus,” Pelosi wrote to Democrats. “That leverage enabled us to fight off Republicans’ poison pill riders and secure dramatic increases in funding for key priorities, such as veterans, health and biomedical research, the opioid crisis, education and child care, and election security. That included nearly doubling funding for Child Care Development Block Grants, achieving a $3 billion increase for the National Institutes of Health, and providing $380 million in Election Security Grants.”

Politico and The Hill both described this bill as “noncontroversial.” Plus, passing a minibus allows “Congress to avoid a yearslong habit of passing nearly all federal spending in one massive omnibus package.”

If the bill does not pass then the lawmakers “could be forced to consider another omnibus measure before the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year.”

(How about we stop spending?)

With this move, the Democrats will force the GOP to negotiate within their own ranks to receive the 218 votes to pass the bill. The GOP had a few problems with caucuses in the past on other spending bills.

The House Freedom Caucus doesn’t know if its members will support the bill according to The Washington Examiner:

Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows, R-N.C., said he fears the House is following a strategy that will hold the most difficult-to-pass bills for much later in the year, leaving little time for a resolution and requiring a last-minute omnibus once again.

“If you start off with the easy ones to pass we’re going to end up with an omnibus in September,” Meadows said. “For me, I want to see what the ultimate strategy is. We’re not taking an official position. I think we’ve got to get back together and talk to some of our folks.”

The move surprised some Republicans because the minibus bill provides “funding for popular programs like Veterans Affairs and the Army Corps of Engineers.”

Pelosi opposes provisions in each bill like “permitting firearms on land controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers and language that would repeal an Obama-era water regulation and place new limitations on the Clean Water Act.” Democrats objected to the firearms provision, but the other two passed the spending panel unanimously. So it’s hard to tell if Pelosi’s plea will work.

Details on Defense Spending

The House Appropriations Committee scheduled a markup session for Thursday. It unveiled the bill on Wednesday, which has a total of $674.6 billion for the Pentagon. Here are the details from The Hill:

The bill would provide $606.5 billion in base discretionary funding, which is about $900 million less than the Trump administration requested but $17.1 billion more than this year’s spending level.

The bill would also provide $68.1 billion for a war fund known as the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account.

The money would pay for a boost of 15,600 troops across the military and a 2.6 percent pay raise for service members, both matching what was requested by the administration.

The bill would also provide $145.7 billion for equipment purchases and upgrades. That’s split $133 billion for base requirements — or $2.5 billion more than requested — and $12.7 billion in OCO.

The procurement money includes $22.7 billion for 12 new Navy ships, two more ships than the administration requested. The two extra ships are littoral combat ships, which Congress continues to support buying — despite the Navy’s plan to transition away from the ship — so that shipyards keep working and will be able to keep pace on future orders.

The bill would also fund a slew of aircraft, including $9.4 billion for 93 F-35 fighter jets and $1.9 billion for 24 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft.

The bill includes funding for the procurement of 16 more F-35s than requested. The plane is built by Lockheed Martin in defense appropriations subcommittee Chairwoman Kay Granger’s (R-Texas) district.

Pushback From White House

The White House didn’t exactly threaten to veto the House bill, but it does not approve of the bill. From The Hill:

“The Administration strongly supports the overall Defense levels included in the BBA. However, given the Nation’s long-term fiscal constraints and the need to right-size the Federal Government, the Administration does not support the BBA’s non-Defense cap of $597 billion, $57 billion above the FY 2019 Budget,” the White House wrote in a statement of administration policy.

In its letter, the administration suggested a series of cuts to nondefense programs in the three appropriations bills that are being considered together in a so-called “mini-bus” package. The suggestions largely reiterated the requests made in the president’s budget proposal, which Congress has largely ignored.

President Donald Trump told Congress in March that he “will never sign another bill like this again” when he signed the $1.3 trillion omnibus package.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I’m not sold on the idea of the clitoral combat ships. Not at all.

    Ragspierre in reply to Tom Servo. | June 7, 2018 at 5:26 pm

    I think all our ships should be very exercised and sensitive, and never “clitoral” combat ships.

    Dejectedhead in reply to Tom Servo. | June 7, 2018 at 7:21 pm

    We need them for surface operations, otherwise all maneuvers will require a deep penetration element to be effective.

    Frank G in reply to Tom Servo. | June 7, 2018 at 7:45 pm

    Stealth “G-Spot” ships would b ideal as most males would have no luck finding them

“(How about we stop spending?)”
Best laugh I’ve had all week.

In other news, the “conservative” GOP will spend a projected $900 billion in deficit next year. Maybe we should vote for Pelosi, since she seems to be the only one who wants to stop spending!

(J/K, she’s a Democrat so of course she’d be worse)

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | June 7, 2018 at 7:00 pm

The good economy is drowning the Democrats.

Charles V Payne
@cvpayne
heading to studio to discuss why market is ignoring trade war fears. Hint: because the market is reacting to an amazing economy and probability have greater access to global markets. The market senses a win around the corner. Even Big Business elites more bullish than headlines

https://mobile.twitter.com/cvpayne/status/1004449252205047809?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2F2018%2F06%2F06%2Fnec-chairman-larry-kudlow-press-conference-on-g7-and-trade%2F

Speaker Ryan and Republicans Blame Pelosi As They Repeatedly Step On Their Own Wieners.

When asked for comment, Pelosi noted she has all of their wieners in her handbag.

“three appropriation bills: Energy and Water, Legislative Branch, and Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.”

Please do oppose these. The ads write themselves. She’s trying to stay relevant

“The Administration strongly supports the overall Defense levels included in the BBA. However, given the Nation’s long-term fiscal constraints and the need to right-size the Federal Government, the Administration does not support the BBA’s non-Defense cap of $597 billion, $57 billion above the FY 2019 Budget,” the White House wrote in a statement of administration policy.
———————————————-

OK, just a few notes…

The structure we lovingly call the “White House” is inarticulate. It does not write anything.

What’s with the weird capitalization…???

    txvet2 in reply to Ragspierre. | June 7, 2018 at 8:22 pm

    You’re getting a little desperate to find things to criticize, aren’t you?

      Ragspierre in reply to txvet2. | June 7, 2018 at 9:48 pm

      No. Didn’t you notice? Or did you think it was “winning”?

        Fen in reply to Ragspierre. | June 8, 2018 at 1:39 am

        Spot on, Rags. I’m just now realizing – the 2016 election? Trump finished 2nd to last. What a loser.

        And household income? Slowest growth since the tax cuts. Impeach now!

        txvet2 in reply to Ragspierre. | June 8, 2018 at 2:01 pm

        Given that every talking head in the media refers to the White House as a living entity, criticizing Chastain for it is a little petty, even for you.

    Fen in reply to Ragspierre. | June 8, 2018 at 1:48 am

    Even worse, the “White” House is really more of an eggshell off-white. More deception from God Emporer Trump.

    And I agree on the weird capitalization. You would think someone would put out a grammatical template for media outlets to synch up with. I think “Style Guide” has a nice ring to it. Why don’t you shoot them an email?

    Caver37 in reply to Ragspierre. | June 8, 2018 at 6:41 am

    Apparently the White House has their own writing style book. I mean that literally. This came up with that story about the retired English teacher who marked up a form letter from the White House. Apparently words like nation, federal government, etc. are capitalized under this style book.

    Anonamom in reply to Ragspierre. | June 8, 2018 at 10:41 am

    “What’s with the weird capitalization…???”

    Those words capitalized would be called “proper nouns.” I believe the topic is covered in first grade.

This is one sick woman. And without a constituency outside of san francisco.

Please try to organize a shutdown. Make it for the week a hundred thousand bikers are coming to celebrate MAGA and Trump.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend