Update from Washington, D.C. 03/18/2011
As reported in the lead article of this edition of E-Pub, the
National Association of Counties (NACo) held its annual
legislative conference March 5-9 in Washington, D.C. Over 100
California county officials traveled to our nation’s capital to
attend the convention, including the CSAC leadership team.
California county officials found the halls of Congress humming
with activity the week of March 7 as lawmakers continued to focus
on the funding bills for fiscal 2011. The federal government
continues to operate on a series of continuing resolutions (CR)
as Congress has been unable to finish any of this year’s
appropriations bills. The current fiscal year began last October
1.
In the ongoing struggle to finalize a long-term CR for this year,
the House approved last month legislation (HR 1) that would have
shaved about $62 billion from current spending. The bill, which
would fund the government through September 30, received a chilly
reception from Senate Democrats. As expected, the Senate rejected
HR 1 on March 9, as well as the Democratic alternative, which
called for a more modest $4.7 billion in spending cuts.
In contrast to HR 1, the two-week CR (H J Res 44) that passed
Congress earlier this month does not contain some of the more
controversial policy issues that were included in the longer-term
package. The stopgap funding measure, which expires on March 18,
eliminated a number of fiscal 2010 congressional earmarks,
including a number of transportation projects.
With the expiration of the short-term CR quickly approaching, the
House cleared March 15 the sixth round of stopgap funding (H J
Res 48) that will last through April 8. The measure, which passed
by a vote of 271-158, slices $6 billion from the federal
government’s current budget. For its part, the Senate approved
the spending package March 17 by a vote of 87-13. President Obama
is expected to sign the measure by Friday in order to avoid a
government shutdown.
Nearly one-third of the $6 billion cut comes from revoking
dollars that were not needed for the 2010 census. Overall, H J
Res 48 reduces or terminates a total of 25 programs for a savings
of $3.5 billion. Lawmakers also realized savings by canceling
congressional earmarks in the fiscal 2010 appropriations bills,
including several accounts funded under the Justice and Interior
subcommittee jurisdictions.
The short-term CR gives the Obama administration and
congressional leaders some breathing room as they continue to
negotiate a longer-term budget deal for fiscal 2011. While there
is some optimism surrounding the budget talks, House GOP leaders
will be pressed by conservatives in the lower chamber to slash at
least $50 billion more from the spending bills.
In a possible break through, key members of Congress from both
parties have signaled that the latest stopgap spending measure
will be the final short-term CR this fiscal year, increasing
chances for a longer-term funding package within the next few
weeks. However, key lawmakers continue to wrangle over which
areas of the budget should be targeted for reductions.
While a possible budget agreement may be on the horizon,
conservatives have their sights set on dismantling parts of
President Obama’s domestic policy agenda, including the
controversial health care law (PL 111-148, PL 111-152). Lacking
other viable options, they are using the fiscal 2011
appropriations bills as the vehicle to try to make major policy
changes.
In other developments, 23 Republican senators sent a letter March
16 to President Obama calling for him to spearhead efforts to
reform entitlement programs. The GOP lawmakers threatened to
block an increase in the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt limit if
the president fails to take the lead on the politically volatile
issue.
On the other side of the Capitol, House Republican leaders are
expected to factor in savings from a reform of entitlement
programs in their fiscal 2012 budget resolution. It is not clear
if GOP budget chiefs will unveil specific details on their
proposed modifications to the entitlement programs, as policy
changes would be made by other committees who have jurisdiction
over the programs.
In addition to restructuring Social Security and Medicare,
Medicaid reform also would be on the table. Of course, any
significant changes to Medicaid could have a major impact on
state and local governments.