Last week's Budget Battles featured a heaping serving of tidbits about the Clinton fiscal 2001 budget. It is only fair, therefore, for this week's column to serve up some tasty morsels from the congressional side of the budget debate.
You Want It By When? (1)
The word from inside the budget committees is that the leadership in both chambers wants the fiscal 2001 congressional budget resolution conference report passed by the close of business on Friday, March 10. That deadline, being two-and-a-half weeks from now, sounds very possible. But with the House currently out of town for the President's Day recess and critically important presidential primaries on March 7 that are likely to prevent votes both that day and the day before, March 10 is really only six or seven legislative days away. Even that tally assumes the House and Senate will meet and vote on Friday, March 3, and Friday, March 10, which is anything but certain.
You Want It By When? (2)
Passing the budget resolution conference report by March 10 would clearly be a new speed record, and after last year-when the House and Senate were both able to adopt the fiscal 2000 budget resolution conference report by the April 15 statutory deadline-the leadership would no doubt like to maintain Congress' new punctuality. Don't hold your breath, though.
Not only will making the self-imposed March 10 deadline be nearly impossible, but duplicating the April 15th feat may be a problem as well given how little legislative time is left between now and then. Even if Congress conducts legislative business on Fridays and on the Mondays when there are no primaries on Tuesdays, that still leaves only 28 legislative days before the April 15 deadline. If Mondays and Fridays (when Congress typically does not conduct legislative business this time of year) are excluded, there are a paltry 17 days.
Is There A Number In The House... And Senate?
House and Senate leaders supposedly have also told the budget committees that they expect them to agree on "the number" for fiscal 2001 by March 3 so that the budget resolutions can be drafted, debated, and passed by March 10. The "number" in question is the size of the on-budget surplus. Unlike previous years, when the amount available for spending increases or tax cuts was determined by budget process rules and restrictions, this year it will be the size of the surplus (not counting Social Security) that provides the guidelines.
The basic difference is the amount of assumed discretionary spending. As of late last week, House Budget Committee Chairman John Kasich, R-Ohio, and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete Domenici, R-N.M., were said to be still holding out for their initial positions-leaving them billions apart. Kasich wants to assume that, with a few adjustments, fiscal 2001 appropriations will be frozen in nominal terms at their fiscal 2000 level. Domenici, on the other hand, supposedly thinks that a nominal freeze is unlikely and wants to assume enough growth to cover inflation.
So Much For Long-Term Projections
The trend in recent years for federal budgets and budget resolutions to be developed and discussed in multiyear terms may go by the wayside this year as congressional budgeteers try to accelerate and expedite the budget process. In a private briefing this week for a select group of reporters, one very senior Senate budget official indicated that the focus of this year's debate would be on fiscal 2001 only. Although the budget process requires multiyear projections in a number of instances, this year those forecasts might be little more than straight extrapolations that are announced as having have no long-term policy implications.
It is not surprising that this strategy would come from the Senate, where tax cuts are a far lower priority than in the House. If the Senate plan prevails, most or all of the spending and revenue decisions would be only for fiscal 2001-which would kill any chance of permanent changes in entitlements or taxes. This would include the elimination of the marriage penalty the House has already passed, which would have an impact on revenues every year after it went into effect. It would not, however, prevent a one-year extension of expiring tax provisions, a one-year change in an existing tax law, or appropriations revisions for fiscal 2001.
And So Much For Long-Term Cap Changes
The word from both sides of Capitol Hill is that the Clinton proposal to extend the caps on appropriations through the end of fiscal 2010 will not be considered. In fact, there is growing sentiment to not even consider the increases in the caps for 2001 and 2002. This does not mean that Congress plans to keep spending at or below the existing caps-only that there may not be a formal effort to raise them officially.
The reason seems to be that few Republican representatives and senators want to go through what they expect to be a protracted debate on the budget process, especially when there is little or no sentiment for extending the caps or the pay-as-you-go rules for taxes and entitlements. Instead, the current preference may be to just spend up to (or slightly below) the level proposed by the president without voting to raise the caps, and hope that the administration will enforce what it proposed rather than the statutory limits.
Question Of The Week
Last Week's Question. Some Budget Battles readers are going to great lengths these days to get one of the all-new "I Won A 2000 Budget Battle" T-shirts. One of the responses to last week's question, which asked, "What is the limit on the number of reconciliation bills that Congress can consider each year?" was sent in the form of a poem. Another provided a detailed history of reconciliation. A third provided a detailed history of that reader's previous entries to the Question of the Week. Budget Battles appreciates the effort, but please keep in mind that the winner is selected by random drawing when there is more than one correct answer, not by the novelty of the response. Of course, if it makes you feel better to send your response in a unique and creative way, please don't hesitate.
The correct answer to last week's question is that there is no limit. Although the original concept was for Congress to consider and pass just one reconciliation bill, that has changed over the years. As a result, in some years there have been instructions in the budget resolution that require more than one reconciliation bill to be drafted and considered. The winner of an "I Won A 2000 Budget Battle" T-shirt, who was indeed selected by random from the multiple correct responses is Booth Jameson, who works for Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del., here in Washington.
This Week's Question. The fact that there can be more than one reconciliation bill every year does not mean that there will be the same number of budget resolutions as reconciliation bills. The question: "What is the limit on the number of budget resolutions that Congress can adopt each year?" Send your response to scollender@nationaljournal.com by 5 p.m. EST on Saturday, Feb. 26, and you could win your own "I Won A 2000 Budget Battle" T-shirt to wear while trying to figure out how to get "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" to return your call. The winner will be selected by random drawing if more than one reader provides the correct answer.