Senate Rejects GOP Spending Bill With Pay Raise

Capitol Hill’s year-end budget process skidded off-track Wednesday as the Senate took the extraordinary step of rejecting a routine appropriation bill--in part because it would allow a congressional pay raise.

The 69-28 vote defeating the measure was an embarrassing setback for Republican congressional leaders eager to end this legislative session so lawmakers can concentrate on campaigning for November’s high-stakes election.

The bill was defeated by a coalition that included Republicans opposed to the pay raise and to spending increases proposed for an array of government programs. They joined a bloc of Democrats who were angry because GOP leaders tried to ram the bill through without allowing them to offer amendments.

The measure, which would fund the Treasury Department and other federal agencies, already had been deemed “unacceptable” by President Clinton, who said it did not include enough funding for the Internal Revenue Service and counter-terrorism efforts. He also objected to the inclusion of an unrelated measure to repeal the 3% excise tax on telephone service.

The bill’s defeat illustrates the steep challenge Republicans face as they head into year-end budget negotiations with Clinton and his Democratic allies. With GOP control of Congress at stake in the election, Republican leaders are under heavy pressure to wrap up the legislative session as early as possible and with a minimum of controversy.

But their efforts are likely to be hamstrung not just by congressional Democrats and veto threats from Clinton but by divisions within GOP ranks as well.

Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) said that defeat of the Treasury spending bill increases prospects that Congress will have to return to Washington after the election to finish its budget work.

The vote also was a reminder of how politically dicey it is for members of Congress to approve a pay raise for themselves in an election year. Republicans voting against the bill included most of those who face tough reelection fights this year.

Another measure of the political sensitivity of the vote: When it became clear that the bill would be rejected, a stampede of supporters switched to vote no. In the end, 26 Republicans joined 43 Democrats--including California’s Barbara Boxer--in voting no. All votes in favor of the bill were cast by Republicans.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who broke her left leg in a fall over the Labor Day weekend, was not present.

John Czwartacki, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), insisted that the defeat was just a “pause,” not a setback, and that Congress eventually would pass a bill similar to the one that failed.

Still, Wednesday’s action came when Congress had little time to waste. The new federal fiscal year begins Oct. 1 and Congress has cleared only two of the 13 appropriation bills needed to keep the government running after that. GOP leaders had hoped to adjourn this session of Congress by Oct. 6. To step up the budget pace, GOP leaders took the unusual step of linking two of the remaining appropriation bills--one funding the Treasury Department and another the legislative branch--and tying them to the unrelated measure to repeal the telephone tax.

Democrats complained bitterly that the package was brought to the floor under parliamentary procedures that prevented them from offering amendments--including politically charged gun-control measures.

Although Democratic legislators and Clinton support the idea of repealing the telephone tax, they objected to including it in an unrelated bill--and to passing it before Congress and the administration reach a broader agreement about the year’s budget priorities.

Clinton’s veto threat also was spurred by his push for more money for the IRS. The bill provided $300 million less than the $8.9 billion Clinton requested for the agency--money he said is needed to help carry out wide-ranging reforms mandated by Congress to make it more responsive to taxpayers. Those concerns were shared by at least one senior Republican, Senate Finance Committee Chairman William V. Roth Jr. of Delaware, who was among those voting against the bill.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) lambasted the bill for including millions of dollars worth of projects that he labeled “pork barrel.” McCain was particularly vitriolic about $14.8 million included for communication equipment for the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.

But Stevens said that most of the Republicans who opposed the bill did so because of the congressional pay raise. Members of Congress, who now earn $141,300 a year, are scheduled to get a 2.7% cost-of-living increase next year unless lawmakers move to specifically block it. The Treasury Department funding bill traditionally is the vehicle to stymie congressional pay hikes, and this version included no such amendment.

That infuriated Democrats who have been lobbying to increase the federal minimum wage by $1. “No way am I going to support raising our salary . . . when this Congress and this Senate has not been willing to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $6.15,” said Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.).

Stevens, a leading proponent of allowing lawmakers annual cost-of-living increases, insisted the vote did not mean the pay raise for lawmakers was dead. “I’m waiting for their wives to get to them,” he said.