Take it or Leave it

By U.S. Senator Jon Kyl When Congress procrastinates, you pay. One of the basic functions of Congress is to produce annual funding bills (12 in all) that keep the government operating. These bills, known as appropriations bills, fund the respective sectors of the federal government for example, one bill funds the Justice Department, another funds the Homeland Security Department, and so on. The 2008 fiscal year began October 1, and yet, Congress has not sent a single appropriations bill to the President. Congress hasn't been this late in two decades. As a result, Congress was forced to pass a temporary measure to fund the government's operations until November 16. Instead of dedicating the time necessary to tackle the individual appropriations bills, the Democratic leadership has devoted the legislative schedule largely to things like naming post offices and voting on a never-ending series of non-binding resolutions on the war in Iraq. The interesting thing is, this appears to be a deliberate strategy to force the President to agree to more spending. As the new deadline of November 16 approaches, the Democratic majority has signaled it intends to combine the appropriations bills into a massive, trillion dollar "omnibus" spending package. This giant bill will be presented at the last minute on a "take it or leave it" basis full of pork, bad policy, and $22 billion over the President's budget. The President's opponents will then say he must sign it or the government will shut down. Of course, that's not really true. A government shut down is merely a political threat to pressure the President not to veto a bloated omnibus bill. Congress can continue to pass temporary measures to keep the government operating even if the President does veto the permanent bill. Legislating with an omnibus bill corrupts the appropriations process, which was designed to ensure that individual spending bills could be carefully scrutinized and amended. Bad bills can be opposed, good bills supported. With an omnibus package, good provisions are coupled together with bad ones, and legislators and the President are forced into an "all or nothing" position. For example, this strategy will be evident during the week of November 5, when Congress will likely consider a large spending bill, known as a "minibus," that combines funding for our veterans with a pork-laden spending bill for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services (Labor-HHS). By doing this, Democrats are using veterans funding as leverage to force senators to approve irresponsible increases in spending for the other departments. Members of Congress should not be forced to choose between providing for our nation's heroes or supporting irresponsible spending. In case you think I exaggerate about such spending, how about a $1 million earmark that would pay for an already well-funded construction of a Woodstock museum in New York? That was in the Labor-HHS bill. Once discovered, I introduced a measure with Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn to strip this egregious earmark from the bill, and our amendment was adopted. With an omnibus bill scrambled together at the last minute, however, the New York senator could put that earmark back in and I would be allowed to vote on the overall bill, not on that earmark. Combining appropriations bills into a massive omnibus package presented on a "take it or leave it" basis will, therefore, result in massive waste and overspending. Result: the American taxpayer will foot the bill for Congress's procrastination for the first 11 months of the year. This wasteful Washington spending must stop.