Posted on 09/08/2002 7:23:03 PM PDT by Jean S
An unwieldy workload and jumbled schedule has left Republican and Democratic leaders in both chambers with no clear exit strategy in sight and the prospect of a lame duck or a longterm continuing resolution increasingly inevitable.
As communities across the nation are swept up in a week of ceremonies marking the one-year anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, lawmakers return to Washington this week for an abbreviated session - allowing them time to participate in their district's memorial events. Congress will also take off next Monday to observe Yom Kippur.
Following the joint New York memorial session last Friday, which occupied nearly a day and a half of lawmakers' time, Congress is facing a serious backlog of legislation yet to be passed. At a bare minimum, Congress must pass a majority of the appropriations bills and the homeland security legislation, as well as handle the delicate issue of war with Iraq, before heading back home for one last pre-election campaign sprint.
Already House and Senate leaders are extending their target adjournment dates of Oct. 4 at least a week. Republicans are also discussing the benefits of passing the homeland security legislation and the Defense appropriations bill and then punting on some of the more nettlesome spending bills and issues by passing a longterm continuing resolution extending into November or possibly next year.
That way lawmakers could avoid the dreaded lame duck session, which leaders on both sides of the aisle and the Capitol usually try to avoid.
"[The lame duck] is the 800-pound gorilla that dares not speak its name," said John Feehery, spokesman for Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). "Nothing good ever happens in a lame duck. That being said, some times you have to have one."
This year, some Republicans are embracing just such a session and the bizarre political turn of events it could produce on Capitol Hill. Already one of the most competitive races in the country, the contest between Sen. Jean Carnahan (D-Mo.) and former Rep. Jim Talent (R-Mo.)has started to attract even more attention because of how it could affect the legislative endgame.
Republicans seized on the notion that because of the race's special election status, if Talent won, he would be immediately instated in the Senate, shifting the Democrat's one-seat majority back to the Republicans for a one- to two-month session at the end of the year.
If Congress does not complete its work and is forced into a lame duck, the scenario goes, Republicans would control both chambers - and with it the appropriations process as well as the rest of the agenda - however fleetingly. In theory, they could push through a flood of bills.
During a closed-door meeting between several GOPleaders and energy lobbyists last Thursday, Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas) highlighted this best-case Republican scenario as a way to leverage Senate Majority Leader Thomas Daschle (D-S.D.) into agreeing to move to an energy conference as soon as possible. The House and Senate passed wildly divergent energy bills this session and many in the energy industry fear the issue has fallen off the radar screen altogether this year, but DeLay believes that if Daschle fears that he may lose control of the agenda later, the Democrat may be eager to cut a deal on energy and other matters sooner rather than later.
The mere mention of just such an end-of-the-year political twist of fate lifted the mood and emboldened those gathered at the meeting, including DeLay, House Energy & Commerce Committee Chairman Billy Tauzin (La.), GOPConference Chairman J.C. Watts (Okla.) and Senate GOPConference Chairman Rick Santorum (Pa.), as well as several energy lobbyists.
The scenario surfaced early last week, and at first most Republicans reacted to it with skepticism.
"What would seem cute at first, now could be real,"said one House GOP source. "Early indications show that this issue has legs. Talent and Carnahan are dead even right now."
By the end of last week, Republicans were beginning to embrace the idea as a real possibility - or at least a way to grease the legislative skids. With the idea of a GOPmajority-controlled lame duck session looming, Republicans believe they could finally wield some power over Senate Democrats who have continued to block a number of key Bush agenda items and judicial nominations.
As she boarded the train that would take her up to the special session in New York last Friday, Republican Conference Vice Chair Deborah Pryce (R-Ohio) pointed out the myriad benefits of a Talent win and a subsequent lame duck.
When asked whether the scenario was making the rounds, she smiled.
"Oh yes," she said. "We could also sail through a lot of [judicial] confirmations."
Republicans are still smarting from the Senate Judiciary panel's party-line rejection last week of Bush nominee Priscilla Owens to a federal judgeship and salivate at the thought of being able to turn the tables on Democrats.
But Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) rejected any notion that control of the chamber could change hands yet again this session, and even if the switch occurred Democrats could block any controversial nominees or legislation through filibuster.
"In a lame duck session you only have a certain amount of time. So it's a nice little political science trivia question, but it's not going to make a difference. Besides, I believe Jean Carnahan is going to win, and win very well," he said.
For now, Senate Democrats give similar short shrift to a long-term continuing resolution that would extend into next year.
While he agreed with House Majority Leader Dick Armey's (R-Tex.) assessment that the target date for adjourning is now Oct. 11, Senate Majority Whip Harry Reid (D-Nev.) flatly rejected the idea of a long-term CR and held out hope for finishing up all legislative work in a month.
"I think it would be better if we finished our work and didn't have a lame duck," Reid said.
In terms of floor time, Reid is also optimistic that a resolution to authorize attacking Iraq would only "eat up a couple days," citing the January 1991 Gulf War debate as precedent.
But others believe providing Congressional approval for a war in Iraq won't be so easy this time around as most U.S. allies continue to caution restraint.
House Republicans are still talking about a vote of Congressional approval some time in October and are already looking at the wide latitude granted in Congress' approval for the Persian Gulf War in 1991 as a guide for writing the legislation. Fresh from a White House briefing, during Wednesday's Conference meeting Hastert cautioned his GOPcolleagues that the Iraq issue was still fluid and said the House would take its cue from the president about scheduling a vote, according to several GOPsources.
The Iraq issue further complicates the schedule, making it more doubtful that there is enough time to complete all the work done that both chambers' leaders say they want to finish in the 107th Congress unless there is a lame-duck session or a long-term CR.
The Senate, working on a dual-track of appropriations in the morning and legislation in the afternoon, will need another two weeks to wrap up the homeland security bill, according to estimates from some Democratic aides. And that's assuming one of the two sides gives in on the issue of presidential flexibility in overseeing employee management in the new agency.
"Someone's got to blink," a Democratic leadership aide said.
After homeland security, Daschle plans to bring up pension reform, which on its own should not eat up that much time. But pension reform now looks like it could be the last amendable legislative vehicle hitting the floor this year, meaning both sides expect it to be a massive Christmas tree full of unrelated amendments.
Even if these amendments are destined for failure, either in floor votes or in conference with the House, their symbolic importance this close to an election will turn the debates into lengthy, divisive battles designed to fire up base voters.
Daschle is also considering bringing up a prescription drug bill again, after Oct. 1 when he is not penned in by budgetary constraints and only needs 51 votes to pass a bill.
But introducing a prescription drug debate at the last minute would likely mean Senate Republicans would counter with amendments to make the elimination of the estate tax permanent - a proposal that plays particularly well in farm states such as South Dakota, Missouri, Minnesota and Iowa where Democratic incumbents are fighting off stiff challenges.
One Democratic leadership aide suggested the best chance for a prescription drug debate would be as part of the pension reform debate on the floor.
Under this timetable, the Senate would clear homeland security and pension reform by early October, leaving time to take up any legislative conference reports such as bankruptcy, terrorism insurance or energy that might be concluded before adjournment. That would also leave a week, more or less, to handle a floor debate and vote on Iraq, with the Senate adjourning by Oct. 11 or so.
That doesn't even consider the fact that there are 10 appropriations bills that still need to be passed by the Senate, and 8 in the House, and not a single appropriation conference report has been passed and signed into law.
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the No. 2 Democrat on Appropriations, said the Senate could pass its remaining spending measures by the end of this month, but only if Daschle and Minority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) agree to fight off extraneous amendments the way they are doing with the homeland security debate.
But certain appropriations bills almost always inspire debates, such as trade with Cuba or the agriculture spending measure.
"If you're going to be talking about all those things, we will be here until Christmas Eve," Inouye said.
On legislation, perhaps. But it would free the President's hand with judicial appointments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.