The first report was from the AP, but since they don't like bloggers to use them or link to them, we'll just talk about the facts of their story without burdening them with the traffic. We'll send it to other, friendlier and more web-savvy sources instead.
The news: A deal has been struck on the House side to move an Iraq funding bill.
Details are still emerging, but initial reports (from that news source that doesn't like links) said only that an agreement had been reached, and that the package would include approximately $165 billion in funding for military operations, plus the Webb "GI bill" provisions, Midwest flood relief, and an unemployment benefits extension.
As time -- here measured in mere minutes -- passed, new details emerged. A second AP report that they also don't want links to hinted that Bush was backing away from his earlier threats to veto war funding that was accompanied by significant restrictions on its use, and unemployment benefits that went to people who had worked less than 20 weeks out of the previous year. Bush had also ruled out a provision Blue Dogs had insisted on to pay for the GI bill, that being a 1/2% surtax on top-earning taxpayers.
That seemed rather curious, until a report in The Hill cleared it up:
The compromise bill will include about $165 billion in funding for the Iraq war with no conditions, such as banning torture or blocking a "status of forces agreement" between the Bush administration and the Iraqi government.
It will include a new program, called the "new GI Bill," to pay the college tuition of Iraq and Afghan war veterans, which will be transferable to family members. The cost of the program will be added to the federal deficit, because there will be no offsetting tax increase.
It will extend unemployment benefits by three months, but will require recipients to have worked at least 20 weeks, a requirement Democrats had sought to shorten.
Mmmm, yeah. That smells like a deal to me! In exchange for agreeing to accept $57 billion more for the Iraq war, Bush was willing to allow Democrats to drop their demands for a ban on permanent bases, torture and the SOFA and their demands on expanding eligibility for unemployment benefits. It really must be said that he's truly a generous man.
Should be an interesting vote, if both the Blue Dogs who said they wouldn't vote for GI bill provisions that weren't budget neutral and the 70 other Members who said they wouldn't vote for war funding that didn't have withdrawal language all stick to their guns.*
* Note to McCain campaign: This is not a statement on firearms policy.
UPDATE: The text of the rule they're going to use isn't available yet, but here's how that "interesting vote" is going to be managed. First, the House will have to pass H. Res. 1281, reported from the Rules committee yesterday, which:
Waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a two-thirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Rules Committee) against any resolution reported from the Rules Committee on the legislative day of June 19, 2008, providing for consideration or disposition of a measure making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008
Then they're going to have to cobble together a procedure that waives PAYGO rules so they can shoehorn in the GI bill provisions, and allows for separate votes on the various provisions -- the war money, the GI bill, the unemployment benefits, etc. -- and then have a final vote on a package that includes whatever provisions get a majority along the way.
The end result will be that the progressives can vote against the war money but for the rest of the stuff, the Blue Dogs can vote against the GI bill but for the rest of the stuff, thereby producing a different majority for each of the provisions, and then everybody can throw up their hands and vote for the final package, which will represent "the best we could do despite my opposition to provision X, Y or Z."
Happy C-SPAN viewing, everybody!
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment