GOP divided on huge spending bill

GOP leaders last week received another omen of how difficult it is going to be to move the most beleaguered of spending bills-the fiscal 2003 Labor-HHS appropriations bill-to the floor in September.

On Friday, a group of 15 moderate Republicans went to the office of House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., demanding more money for the bill. The maneuvering leaves House leaders having to find some way to placate moderates, now firmly aligned with appropriators who want more money released, and conservatives, who want to keep spending at the president's overall budget figure of $759 billion despite the Senate's insistence on upping that figure by $9 billion.

Hastert Friday mused about his predicament, comparing it to a "tug of war" within the party, between the two parties and between the two houses of Congress. "It is going to take time, and you know, a little nudging along, but we will get it done," Hastert said.

Conservatives have already shown they are willing to play spoiler, having two weeks ago convinced the leadership to halt action on appropriations bills because they felt that some of the earlier bills were flush with funds that left larger bills, like the Labor-HHS appropriations, shortchanged.

To see that history did not repeat itself and leaders did not agree to more spending at the end of the year, conservatives demanded-and got-assurances that the Labor-HHS spending measure would move to the floor at the beginning of September.

For them, it is a way of proving that the various subcommittee allocations work-or a way of showing that they will have to be revised to work under the president's budget ceiling.

"If we can demonstrate that the bills can pass" at the prescribed allocations, "then everything's good to go," said an aide to a House conservative. "If not, then there are problems."

Conservatives say that the allocation for the Labor-HHS appropriations bill, which is $129.9 billion, the same as President Bush's request, fully funds critical programs, despite complaints. "We're pretty confident this can pass," said the aide.

But moderates say they will not deliver the votes unless education, home-heating and job programs are beefed up. With the backing of Young and other appropriators, the Tuesday Group of moderates met Friday with Hastert and Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, to make their case.

"They needed to understand that there is more than one wing to the party," said Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del.

While he "respects the responsibility of the House to live within budget constraints," Castle said it was politically unwise to proceed with a Labor-HHS spending bill knowing that the House bill is more than $4 billion less than the Senate version. Such a scenario, Castle said, leaves many moderates vulnerable to Democratic attacks that they do not support popular programs, such as education.

"It will be 'the' vote on the issue before the November election," Castle said.