Senate moves toward vote on compromise version of wartime supplemental

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Wednesday moved to cut off debate on a $106 billion fiscal 2009 supplemental appropriations conference report for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, setting up a cloture vote on Friday, unless Republicans agree to do it before then.

"We hope that we can work out an agreement to finalize this tomorrow," Reid said. That course appears likely, with senators loath to remain in town to vote Friday.

The Senate would likely quickly move to final passage if they vote to cut off debate, which is expected.

Reid's move comes after Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Wednesday he has lifted holds on the supplemental and other legislation that he placed because Democratic leaders dropped a provision from the bill barring the release of detainee mistreatment photos.

Graham said he is supporting the supplemental because White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel called him Wednesday and told him that, if necessary, President Obama will make sure the pictures "never see the light of day."

Emanuel didn't explicitly mention classifying the photos, Graham said. "I don't know of any other way for them to never see the light of day unless they go burn them," Graham said.

He also said he talked with Attorney General Eric Holder, who "said an executive order would change the classification."

Graham also said he was assured by Reid the Senate would take up the provision as free-standing legislation. It was approved by unanimous consent before the Senate adjourned Wednesday night.

Meanwhile, amid partisan grumbling over the appropriations process, the House Wednesday resumed consideration of the $64.4 billion fiscal 2010 Commerce-Justice-Science spending bill after House Democratic leaders moved to allow 33 amendments of the 127 that were submitted.

"What we are doing ... is setting a bad and dangerous precedent," House Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Frank Wolf, R-Va., said of Democrats' decision to limit amendments.

Speaking during debate on the bill, Wolf said that typically there has been no limit on offering amendments to appropriations bills.

"Traditionally, whether it has been Democrats or Republicans in the majority, we have had open rules on spending bills and a respectful working relationship across the aisle," Wolf said. "That is what the American people expect, a cooperative attitude and the opportunity for full scrutiny of how their tax dollars are being spent."

The House initially began consideration of the bill Tuesday evening under a rule that required amendments be submitted before June 15, known as a preprinting requirement. Republicans decried the requirement, citing that typically there has been no limitation on offering amendments to spending bills. In protest, Republicans sought to have the House consider their 102 amendments -- of the 127 offered -- to the bill.

In response, House Democratic leaders halted action on the measure late Tuesday night and drafted a rule for the bill that would limit amendments. The House approved it Wednesday afternoon, 223-199. Of the 33 amendments allowed, Democrats offered nine and Republicans 24.

Wolf and other Republicans said that they followed the rules in submitting their 102 amendments and that the "rules were then changed in the middle of the night and now we have an even more controlled process."

Democrats insisted on the amendment deadline because it assures that members know what they are voting on, and it would help House Democrats meet their schedule of finishing work on all 12 appropriations bills before the August recess.

House Appropriations Chairman David Obey charged the Republicans with trying to "filibuster by amendment."

"The hard fact is that everybody says they want appropriations bills to be finished individually, not collectively in an omnibus, and yet we only have six weeks to accomplish that," Obey said.

He said Democrats have tried to reach out to Republicans to come up with a way to shorten debate to meet the schedule for the appropriations bills, but he claims Republicans do "not want to be limited in number [of amendments] or time."

Obey added, "We have an obligation to get our work done" and blamed the uncooperativeness of Republicans for the need to use a rule limiting amendments.

House Democratic leaders have not decided if they intend to use similar rules for future appropriations bills that come to the floor, according to Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y.