Note To Readers: This is the first of a three-part series examining the House appropriations process from the perspective of several key players.
In December 1994, conservative House Republicans passed over "Old Bull" appropriators to anoint one of their own--Rep. Robert Livingston, R-La.--as chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. Livingston immediately gave the conservatives one of the things they wanted: Wielding a "Cajun scalpel," he promised major surgery on federal programs. But three years later, some of those same conservatives say they feel Republican appropriators have abandoned conservative principles. And in interviews over the past several weeks, House members and aides made it clear the division within the GOP Conference that emerged this year has not been mended--and that next year's appropriations process may be even more of an ideological battleground.
While Republican appropriators gripe that conservatives cannot be depended on to vote for bills even after they have gotten most of what they wanted, the conservatives are upset that the balanced budget deal with President Clinton resulted in increased spending for programs they detest: A recent CBO analysis showed discretionary spending increased from $502.6 billion in fiscal 1997 to $527.2 billion in fiscal 1998.
"It's a Washington problem," said Rep. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., one of the conservatives who fought spending measures this past year. "Career politicians don't have the discipline to stop spending money. There is a direct connection between spending money and being re-elected."
Coburn acknowledged, however, that he and his allies do not always have enough votes to force changes. "There are not enough conservatives in the Congress and some of them are co-opted," he said. Coburn said this year's problems began with the balanced budget agreement, which he termed "a sham," adding, "I'm embarrassed to be a part of a Congress that did that."
The conservatives feel the appropriations bills that flowed as a result of the budget plan were not much better.
"Liberal priorities were funded," said Rep. David McIntosh, R-Ind., another conservative. "That will be an ongoing fight."
Added Cobun, "I'm disgusted by the process and I want to be a part of changing that." The problem, he contended, is that GOP appropriators cut deals with Democrats when the bills were written. "It should be the Republican majority bill," he said, contending that Republicans should be willing to bring to the floor funding measures that reflect their priorities, and then haggle with Democrats. "The compromise should come on the floor," he said. "If we're not loyal to the conservative base that put us in there, we don't belong to be in there."
Rep. John Shadegg, R- Ariz., echoed those feelings, saying that cutting deals with Democrats did not result in the "focused agenda [that] was needed." But appropriators should not shoulder all of the blame, Shadegg said. "There was a lack of an agenda from our leadership from Day One," he contended. "Bob Livingston's job was to get bills signed. That's all he cared about."
Republican leaders should be willing to pressure subcommittee chairmen to produce acceptable bills, the conservatives contend. "If you're a subcommittee [chairman], you should stand for our party," Coburn said.
McIntosh went a step further, saying that as part of the process, House Republicans should review appropriations bills before they go to the floor. "I think they ought to send the bills back through the Republican Conference and then to the floor," he said. Shadegg agreed, adding that early deals with the Democrats amounted to a "betrayal to the voters who put [us] in the majority."
Toward the end of the session, conservatives organized to station a member of their group on the House floor while funding measures were being debated. Coburn said he anticipates conservatives will be ready for the fights they believe will be necessary next year.
"I would anticipate an organized process for the conservative viewpoint to be heard," he said. Shadegg said if Republican appropriators do not change their strategy, they should be prepared for big floor fights. "If the appropriators don't get that message ... then they'd better expect to spend a lot of time on the floor," he declared.
McIntosh said he expects conservatives to force House Republican leaders to play a more active role in the appropriations process. "There will be pressure from the right for the leadership to rein in subcommittee chairs," he said. And Shadegg would not rule out challenging the positions of subcommittee chairmen who do not get the message. "Anybody who walks in and says, 'I don't have an obligation to advance a majority party agenda,' is in trouble," he vowed.
Next: The GOP appropriators respond.
NEXT STORY: OMB Pushes Up Y2K Deadline