No Predetermined Outcome in Budget Negotiations
Everyone wants to know: how will the budget impasse end? This is a question without an answer.
The situation is so fraught that we aren’t hearing the usual pundits saying: most likely the outcome will be [fill in the blank]. In a December 1 column, I discussed the only certain parameter: what must end, will end. The “when and how” was opaque then. Five weeks later, it is no clearer.
It is hard to imagine that Congress can produce a final Ag/FDA appropriations bill by January 19, which is just two weeks away. As far as anyone knows, there is no agreement on: total spending, the distribution of spending (non-defense vs. defense and VA), and the allocation of spending (by subcommittee). It is impossible to negotiate an appropriations bill without that information.
Specific to the Ag/FDA bill, there are additional complications. There are some very difficult-to-resolve policy riders. Further, House Republicans may not be united on possible program cuts that would impact farm and feeding programs.
If the Members can resolve those overarching issues, staff can draft funding bills quickly. Moving such bills through Congress is another matter entirely.
Segments of the House Republican majority have vowed to never again vote for consolidated funding bills–whether packaged as an omnibus (up to 12 bills in one) or a minibus (moving three or four larger bills that each include three or four subcommittee bills). Without those votes, Speaker Johnson does not have a majority to support the House Republicans’ proposed program cuts and policy riders.
If a final bill isn’t ready, then Speaker Johnson is likely to have the same problem on January 19 as he did on November 17 and as Speaker McCarthy had on September 30: do you pass another short term CR or let the government shut down if you don’t have a satisfactory deal? No one–not even Speaker Johnson—knows for sure what he will do.
A shutdown is always a possibility (and has some advocates), but then what? It is expensive and disruptive to put the government on emergency shutdown status, so Congress usually passes short term continuing resolutions while they continue to negotiate. Taxpayers and voters will not be cheering those who are responsible for a shutdown.
Speaker Johnson has proposed a full-year CR if the impasse cannot be broken through negotiations. Leaving aside that some of his caucus have vowed never to vote for a CR again, his version of a full-year CR is not an “everyone shares the pain” solution. He would sequester 1% in total government funding, but provide increased funding for defense, VA, and a few other programs. Those increases would be paid for by dramatic cuts in non-defense programs, losses that would be significantly greater than if the cuts were across the board for the entire government.
What must end, will end. Assessing the when and how is frustrating because every possible path to resolution appears to be blocked by countervailing politics and policies. As a result, nothing is predetermined about what will happen. We can only watch in real-time and hope the resolution does not adversely affect FDA.
Editorial Note:
The Analysis and Commentary section is written by Steven Grossman, Executive Director of the Alliance for a Stronger FDA.