What A Dumb Idea!

The Republicans think the Democrats dumb, the Republicans want to chop up the continuing resolution to fund the government… their first idea was to cut the IRS, the FBI, cut funding to LGBTQ+ programs, and programs like SNAP, WIC, and Headstart. But the Democrats didn’t even vote on the bill.

Now Speaker Johnson wants to…

What’s a laddered CR? What we know about the House GOP's new plan to avoid a shutdown
USA Today
By Riley Beggin, Ken Tran, and Joey Garrison
November 4, 2023

As Congress nears another government funding deadline on Nov. 17, House Republicans are considering a new approach to extending the current budget that House Speaker Mike Johnson is calling a "laddered CR."

It would be a novel type of continuing resolution, the tool typically used by Congress to extend funding levels to keep the government running in lieu of an agreement on next year's federal budget.

"There's a growing recognition that we're going to need another stopgap funding measure," Johnson, the new House leader from Louisiana, said Thursday during his first press conference.

He had initially planned to support extending the existing funding agreement — which kept the government operating at current spending levels 45 days past the end of the fiscal year — through Jan. 15.

But now Republicans are considering a "laddered CR" that would extend the deadline for each of the 12 individual appropriations bills, rather than the budget as a whole, Johnson said.

Hun? What is a “laddered CR?” You know it is not good when it is something proposed by the Speaker and the Republicans and you would be right!

The proposal would theoretically encourage Congress to consider and pass smaller budget bills — the official process laid out in a 1970s-era law, but which is rarely followed. Instead, Congress typically bundles the 12 appropriations bills into a single, massive omnibus bill.

But it would also create a series of funding deadlines that, if not met, would shut down sections of the government at different times. It would also create repeated negotiation chokepoints for a closely-divided Congress that has proven particularly fractious.

This idea “S**ks,” the first bill had everything that the was on the Republicans’ dream list and it got rejected by the Senate.

Politico reported,

With the Nov. 17 cutoff date just over two weeks away, Johnson said there was a “growing recognition” that a continuing resolution might be necessary to avoid a shutdown. OK, fine, all good. Then he told reporters he’s considering a “laddered” CR as a way to keep the government’s lights on.

[…]

In practice, the proposed system would create a rolling series of partial shutdown threats affecting different federal agencies at different times. And given Congress’ recent history with passing individual spending bills, it’s probably a recipe for a slow-motion debacle.

In reality, the most likely result would be a quick government-wide shutdown if Johnson actually moves forward: “Democrats and the White House would never go for it. And a number of Republicans, particularly appropriators charged with overseeing those funding bills, would likely think it’s a bad idea,” Katherine Tully-McManus and Caitlin Emma write.

Why is it a bad idea?

In the continuing resolution bill there are funds for Israel and Ukraine, well the Republicans want Putin to win so they don’t want to have any funds in the continuing resolution for Ukraine so by separating the there would be a vote on Israel but somehow the bill to fund Ukraine seems to gotten tied up in committee… sorry. And all the other items in the original continuing resolution that the Republicans don’t like will never get voted on, and that is why the Republicans want to split the items up and vote on them separately.

The Republicans hope that when the Senate Democrats table the Israel funding bill the Republicans can jump up and down pointing their finger at the Democrats say… “The Democrats don’t want to fund Israel!”

Roll Call writes;

Johnson: House GOP looking at new twist to stopgap funds fight
Speaker raises the prospect of a ‘laddered’ approach to avoid a partial shutdown
By David Lerman and Aidan Quigley
November 2, 2023

But a laddered approach would complicate the funding process and could be difficult to implement, senior Democratic appropriators warned.

“Well, [Johnson’s] never served on the Appropriations Committee,” said top Energy-Water Appropriations Subcommittee Democrat Marcy Kaptur of Ohio. “And I would have to study that because if it’s going to cause all kinds of hiccups across the executive branch, that’s not a very good way to govern.”

House Appropriations ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., was more pointed in her remarks.

“I think the speaker doesn’t have a clue. …He doesn’t know about the appropriations process,” she said. “That’s 12 shutdowns. What are we talking about? I say I have no idea what that means and I don’t believe the speaker has any idea of what it means.”

Most people don’t have the foggiest notion of what goes on to pass a bill, there is a lot of back room discussion (or arm twisting depending upon your point of view.) to get a bill passed, a lot of give and take.

Now suppose Sam has been trying to get more navy ships built in his state and George in his states want a new bridge. Pete who sits on the Appropriations committee wants to fund an overseas war comes up to Sam and says, “You know those ships that you want, well I can get you funding if you vote to fund the war effort.” The next thing George knows is the funds for his bridge has been slashed and Sam votes to fund the war overseas.

You don’t think those thing happen? Well last spring the Army Corp of Engineers announced that the funding for the two Cape Cod bridges was approved, weeks later they said that the funding was rejected. But I noticed something that a southern legislator announced that his state just got funding approved for a bridge. Coincidence?

A laddered continuing resolution would be like a line item veto.

Suppose Congress is split 50/50, Trump is president and the two parties worked out a deal the Republicans got what they wanted funding cuts to Headstart and the Democrats got what they want, healthcare for trans youth. Now suppose there is a line item veto and Trump signs the funding cuts to Headstart but vetoes the healthcare for trans youth. The Democrats want the Republicans to override the veto and the Republicans say “Nope, no way!” and walk away.

That is why the “laddered continuing resolution” and a line item veto a really bad idea it will give too much power to the Republicans.