July 22, 2011

"Cut, Cap and Balance"

Negotiations over raising the debt ceiling are continuing on Capitol Hill. As part of that discussion the House considered H.R. 2560, the “Cut, Cap and Balance Act”. Before the first vote was even cast in the House, the President announced that he would veto the bill. H.R. 2560 was presented as the House’s approach to addressing the debt ceiling. It calls for an immediate cut of $111 billion for FY 2012, which is the same amount of cuts included in the Republican budget proposal that passed the House in April. It also imposes spending caps for the next ten years. Finally, the bill references three balanced budget constitutional amendments and REQUIRES that Congress approves one of them BEFORE the debt ceiling can be raised.

Since constitutional amendments require a two-thirds vote for passage and ratification by the states, the chances of this amendment even moving beyond Congress are zero. H.R. 2560 is a nonstarter and does nothing to bring us closer to a resolution. It’s just another example of this House refusing to move one centimeter toward a compromise.

The Senate today voted down H.R. 2560, so it won’t even make it to the President’s desk for that promised veto. Because of a family commitment, I was not in Washington for this vote. I certainly would have voted NO on H.R. 2560, which passed in the House and the entire vote is recorded below:

FAA

At this writing, parts of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are scheduled to shut down at midnight. Funding for the FAA must be reauthorized periodically, and the most recent reauthorization expired a couple years ago. The House voted on the 21st extension this week. This is a significant number because 20 other times both the House and Senate passed noncontroversial extensions of the existing bill. Not this time. The House-passed bill eliminates some funding for airline service to 13 rural communities.

The place to have this debate is in the Conference Committee where the House and Senate reauthorization bills will be merged. Instead, the House took what has been a routine extension and turned it into something that won’t pass the Senate. If the extension expires tonight, it will mean $200 million a week in lost revenue because airline ticket taxes won’t be collected and it will mean the halting of $2.5 billion in airport construction projects. And, by the way, the Senate appointed conferees many months ago to work with the House on a final bill so we wouldn’t need any more extensions. But they don’t have anyone to negotiate with because the Republicans in the House refuse to appoint their conferees.

Consumer Protection

Yesterday the House considered H.R. 1315: To amend the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act to strengthen the review authority of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) of regulations issued by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB). To translate that title for you: this bill seeks to weaken the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) established as part of the Wall Street reform bill passed last year.

H.R. 1315 makes it easier for the FSOC to overturn CFPB rules. It also changes the standard under which those rules can be overturned. Currently a rule must be found to threaten the safety and soundness of the financial system. H.R. 1315 weakens that provision by allowing rules to be overturned if they are simply inconsistent with a bank’s safe and sound operations. H.R. 1315 also replaces the CFPB director with a five person commission, thus weakening the agency’s authority. Finally, this bill prevents the consumer protection responsibilities that start when the office opens (which was yesterday) from going into effect until the Senate confirms a director. Senate Republicans have repeatedly said that they will block ANY nominee, no matter who they are.

So H.R. 1315 is really all about weakening one of the key provisions of Dodd-Frank, the one that most directly impacts consumers. I voted NO. H.R. 1315 passed and the entire vote is recorded below:

Appropriations

The House continued work on appropriations bills with consideration of H.R. 2551, the FY 2012 Legislative Branch Appropriations. Not surprisingly, the bill represents a reduction in funding from previous fiscal years. That is expected and necessary. However, I could not support this bill because some of the cuts are too steep and don’t make sense. For example, funding for the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is reduced by 6.4%. Every dollar invested in the GAO results in $4 of taxpayer savings. That’s because many GAO reports identify best practices and point out inefficiencies in government programs, which saves money. Furthermore, the GAO has a great deal of projects competing for resources, including many new requests that have been included in the 2012 appropriations bills that the House is debating. I voted NO. H.R. 2551 passed and the entire vote is recorded below:

Ethics

An amendment was offered to the Legislative Branch appropriations bill that would have cut 40% of the budget for the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE). The amendment failed by a vote of 102-302 so it was not added to the overall bill. You may recall that this was the entity established in 2008 after a year of work by the Special Task Force on Ethics Enforcement. I served as Chair of that Task Force. I spoke against the amendment because it would have significantly limited the OCE’s ability to do its job. The OCE is the first independent entity in the history of the House to review ethics matters of Members and staff. It is too important, for practical and for symbolic purposes, to weaken or abolish.

What's Up Next Week

Negotiations will continue over how to address the debt ceiling.