House budget proposal sets stage for political brawl

With a massive package of budget cuts passed Saturday by the House, the stage is set for a federal spending showdown that will pose a grave test for both political parties and could lead to the first government shutdown in 15 years.

Coming less than two weeks before expiration of a stop-gap funding measure for 2011, the Republican budget represented an unequivocal and adamant demand for the deepest spending reductions in generations. Both congressional chambers are out of session this week, leaving only a handful of days to bridge deep divisions and reach an agreement by the March 4 deadline.

The package, passed before dawn Saturday after a three-day voting spree for amendments seeking ever deeper cuts, would eliminate more than $60 billion in federal spending over the next seven months. It represents a triumph for newly empowered budget hawks, who have made shrinking the size of government their top priority in the two months since their party seized control of the House.

But the budget-cut package has been declared a nonstarter in the Democratic-led Senate, and President Obama has promised a veto. Democrats are instead urging a spending freeze, something House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) has rejected outright, even on a short-term basis to allow for bipartisan talks.

Immediately after the vote Saturday, Boehner called on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) to put the proposal up for a vote. He offered no overture for negotiation.

“We will not stop here in our efforts to cut spending, not when we’re broke and Washington’s spending binge is making it harder to create jobs,” Boehner said in a statement.

Among House members, the comments were equally blunt.

“Right now, the best offer is on the table. I don’t think any negotiation goes on without them having to give,” said freshman Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.).

Democrats also were direct: “You understand this is all dead on arrival about 100 yards from here,” Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) said, referring to the Senate chamber at the other end of the Capitol.

The standoff is certain to test Democrats’ willingness to carve into favored programs and Republican leaders’ ability to control the most ardent budget cutters in their ranks.

The two chairmen of the powerful House and Senate Appropriations committees, Rep. Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) and Sen. Daniel K. Inouye (D-Hawaii), have been in conversations as the process has evolved. The White House is also expected to play a role.

“Neither house of Congress is in a position to dictate terms to the other, so I remain hopeful that we will come to a sensible accommodation,” Inouye said.

The deadlock has federal agencies beginning to plan for closure and federal workers braced for layoffs. Memories of a series of shutdowns in 1995 and 1996 — also the result of a budget standoff between a Republican-led House and Democratic White House — swirled. As in 1995, Republicans in the House are claiming a clear mandate for tough budget cuts after commanding election victories.

As lawmakers left for the week, Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) had drawn a line in the sand — immediate spending cuts — although neither has specified publicly how much would be acceptable.

House Democratic leaders offered a monthlong stop-gap measure that would hold spending at current levels as an overture to keeping the government running. McConnell quickly rejected the offer as “simply unacceptable.”

Both of the GOP leaders are juggling demands from conservative House members who have shown themselves unafraid to buck the leadership. The budget plan passed Saturday was amended nearly 70 times over nearly 100 hours of debate. The changes largely reflect the vision of federal power of the party’s most conservative wing.

Additional cuts in spending, restrictions on environmental regulation, elimination of support for Planned Parenthood and defunding implementation of Obama’s healthcare law were approved.

Even military spending, long consider out of bounds for GOP budget hawks, was trimmed. A bipartisan vote eliminated $450 million for development of a second engine for the Joint Strike Fighter jet, a project Boehner had long backed. International aid was cut about 20%.

These late additions promise to further complicate negotiations in the coming days, and probably weeks. Democrats immediately felt pressure from dozens of interest groups, advocates and unions to stand firm to protect core Democratic initiatives. The Republican cuts, advocates said, had less to do with budgeting than ideology.

Advocates blasted the GOP bill on Saturday as an assault on wildlife and environmental protection, pointing to provisions that prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases and taking action under portions of the Clean Water Act. The bill cuts funding for the EPA by about a third.

“The House vote is a betrayal of the American people. It demonstrates beyond any doubt that the people’s House has been railroaded by the ‘tea party’ into adopting a bill that would eliminate countless safeguards that protect our air, water, land and oceans,” said Scott Slesinger, legislative director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Still, when the Senate begins voting on the bill early next month, it would not be surprising to see proposals for further spending reductions. Nearly two dozen Democratic senators are up for reelection in 2012, many from conservative states where budget cuts are a top concern for an edgy electorate.

Republicans, meanwhile, are caught between the vocal and energized small-government conservatives in their party — some of whom have urged the leadership to allow a shutdown — and moderate and independent voters who support deficit reduction in theory but cringe at specifics.

There was evidence, too, that the appetite for spending cuts had limits and political ramifications even for Republicans. Two amendments that would have dug even deeper into nondefense discretionary spending — bringing those programs to 2008 and 2006 levels — were rejected.

The appetite for a government shutdown is less clear. For now, both sides are engaged in a preemptive blame game.

“Both sides believe they will win the public opinion war,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said. “What happened in ‘95, the House did not win public opinion. This time is different.”

kathleen.hennessey@latimes.com

lisa.mascaro@latimes.com