In an old Henny Youngman joke (What other type of Youngman joke is there?), Henny would say, "So I said to myself... 'Self,'" and then with his impeccable timing wait for the audience to laugh as it realized that was all there was to the one-liner. The laughter was usually boisterous even decades after the joke was first used.
The line seems appropriate for this week's "Budget Battles," because over the past few days I have been asking myself what could happen to make this year's debate turn out differently. Here are the three questions I keep asking myself to consider:
1. Is it really possible that, as the House and Senate leadership tried to indicate over the past week, Congress will get its act together and not just agree on a fiscal 2000 budget resolution but actually pass it by the April 15 deadline?
The two keys to getting this done will be (1) a generally accepted agreement among congressional Republicans that it will be far worse for them not to pass a budget resolution than to pass one that does not please everyone in the party, and (2) to find some way of finessing the most difficult decisions at this very early point in the budget process.
A generally accepted agreement has proven itself to be increasingly elusive in recent years, as ideological right-wing Republicans have been unwilling to compromise with GOP moderates (and vice versa), even when it means watching the process blow up as a result. Last year, for example, the more militantly conservative House Republicans preferred no budget resolution to the one that would have been acceptable to the Senate.
To make things happen this year, the new House leadership will have to get everyone to agree that, in general, cooperation rather than confrontation will be critical. On the budget, this will mean that no budget resolution for the second year in a row would be the worst possible option. What makes this a tough task, however, is the narrower Republican majority in the House combined with a re-energized right wing following the party's 1998 election losses. Any six Republicans who defy the leadership can bring the whole effort crashing down.
Finessing the tough decisions, on the other hand, may actually be the easiest way to go at this point in the budget process. This could be accomplished if the House and Senate adopt a bare-bones budget resolution with as little detail as possible -- limited rhetoric and few numbers, not even function by function totals. This would allow everyone to claim at this early stage in the process that the budget resolution could accommodate his or her preferred policies.
The real tough choices would be left until later in the debate, and the process could certainly get hung up when budget push finally comes to budget shove. In the meantime, however, things would move ahead and Republicans would be able to claim that they were making the railroad run on time.
2. Is it really possible that Republicans will agree to increase appropriations caps, as both Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and House Appropriations Committee Chairman C.W. Bill Young, R-Fla., have proposed over the past few weeks?
If the caps are actually increased (as opposed to just bypassed with some gimmick), it will be the biggest budget story of the year. Republicans will be formally and publicly ceding one of the main issues that they have used for years to distinguish themselves from Democrats.
They key to making this work will be the specific additional spending that Republicans propose with the cap increase. Education and military spending increases are extremely popular at the moment, and if most or all of the cap adjustment is devoted to these two areas there is a possibility that the initiative could be successful.
The question is whether spending on just education and the Pentagon will be enough to attract the votes needed to get around the cap-some members will want assurances that other programs will get some additional funds as well before they agree to go on record in favor of higher spending. Democrats are likely to demand that a majority of Republicans first vote for the new caps before they cast their own ballots, so the GOP leadership will have to get over a great deal of rank-and-file reluctance on this issue.
The effort will be easier in the House, where only a simple majority will be needed. A filibuster in the Senate will require 60 votes, however, and that may be difficult to overcome-especially if it is lead by a Republican and Democrats do not want to do anything to make the budget debate easier.
3. Is it really possible that the differing tax-cut preferences in the House and Senate can be compromised?
The 10 percent across-the-board tax cut being pushed by House Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, R-Ohio, may be dead, but the overall issue is still very much in play. Kasich still prefers a bigger reduction that would go into effect immediately; Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., prefers a tax cut no bigger than the surplus not including Social Security, and only when there is a non-Social Security surplus.
The two keys here are Kasich and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. Because the votes probably do not exist in the Senate to pass a Kasich-like tax cut, the question is whether Kasich and his supporters can be convinced that the Domenici plan is an acceptable alternative. There have been some indications Hastert has told Kasich that at some point he will have to compromise or risk being replaced as chairman. But it is not clear that Budget Committee Chairman Kasich has that type of flexibility, since Presidential Candidate Kasich ("Budget Battles," Feb. 24) is trying to appeal to the more fiscally conservative base of supporters who are active in Republican primaries.
If Kasich is unwilling, then Hastert will have to decide whether a tax compromise is worth the turmoil that would come from usurping Kasich's role in some way.
Any one of these wild cards could turn this year's budget debate into a productive (or at least entertaining) process. Otherwise, though, we're likely looking at a repeat of last year's debacle.
The Budget Countdown
As of today, there are a maximum of 27 legislative days left before the April 15 statutory deadline for Congress to agree on a budget resolution conference report, and 114 legislative days before the start of fiscal 2000. Take away Mondays and Fridays, when Congress typically does not conduct much legislative business, and there are only a scant 17 days before April 15-and 63 days before fiscal 2000 begins.
Question Of The Week
Last Week's Question. Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., is the most likely person to become the new ranking Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee when Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., retires at the end of this session. Many "Budget Battles" readers correctly noted that Sen. Ernest Hollings, D-S.C., is technically next in line, but passed up his ranking role on Budget years ago to play a similar role on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee-and it is very likely he will do so again next year, leaving the position to Conrad. Congratulations to Tom Kahn, House Budget Committee Democratic staff director, who was chosen at random from all of the correct entries and receives an "I Won A 1999 Budget Battle" T-shirt.
This Week's Question. Want your own "I Won A Budget Battle" T-shirt to wear while watching C-SPAN replay the House and Senate Budget Committees fiscal 2000 budget resolution markups? Just answer the following question: As noted above, the Republican leadership may now be trying not just to get the budget resolution passed but to get it passed by the April 15 deadline. What was the only budget resolution that was adopted by the deadline? Send your responses to scollender@njdc.com.
NEXT STORY: DOE announces energy-saving measures