Spending bills deadlocked, no compromise on horizon

With the clock ticking for an agreement to wrap up the remaining spending bills, there were few signs of movement Wednesday. The Appropriations subcommittees were hammering out deals on a bill-by-bill basis, with a deadline Wednesday to kick unresolved issues upstairs to be handled by the panels' front offices. But all of that work could be fruitless if Democrats do not figure out a way to break the impasse over Iraq war funding.

The Democratic offer of $30 billion limited to protective equipment for troops and operational costs in Afghanistan has no traction with Republicans. A Senate GOP leadership aide said the figure should be closer to the $70 billion sought by the Pentagon and should not differentiate between funding for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I'm surprised they haven't reconsidered that by now. I don't think they want to be in the position of saying some troops are more important than others," the aide said.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., was elusive about whether the omnibus will include Iraq war funding at all, much less if it would have restrictions on its use.

"I don't think that's a given," Hoyer said. "I don't think a figure has been arrived on, but I think there is no doubt the troops will be funded."

Also, there is a growing sense among Republicans that the majority is undermining its "split-the-difference" plan by adding $7 billion to $8 billion in additional emergency spending to their $484 billion top line. The top-line figure is $11 billion above President Bush's request, and by adding the emergency funds, Democrats are creeping toward their original spending proposals. The total top line would exceed Bush's proposal by as much as $25 billion if $6.4 billion in emergency funds added to the Defense appropriations bill he signed into law previously are counted.

Emergency funds have emerged as a sticking point with House Appropriations ranking member Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., on top of the lack of Iraq war funding.

"Iraq money that has no strings attached or language attached would be a part of reasonable movement toward a compromise," he said. "But if that's the only piece, and you've got other things that are totally undermining the split-the-difference [offer]" it could destroy chances for a deal.

Lewis said his preference was to get the spending bills passed. "I personally don't think [continuing resolutions] benefit the institution at all, and I wouldn't recommend that to the president or otherwise," he said.

Although there have been bipartisan talks at the staff level, he said House Appropriations Chairman David Obey, D-Wisc., has not reached out to Lewis throughout this process.

"I haven't talked to him since well before the [Thanksgiving] break," Lewis said.

Democrats are preparing for the possibility of a CR, which could run through mid-February or March. That would mark the second major collapse of the budget process in as many years. Hoyer pledged not to resort to a yearlong CR, as Democrats did this year just after they reclaimed control of Congress.

"There is no interest in a long-term CR," Hoyer said.