White House, lawmakers hail year-end deal on spending, taxes

Few ringing endorsements could be heard from either side for the sprawling package.

J. Scott Applewhite/AP
House Rules Committee Chairman Pete Sessions, R-Texas, left, with Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., right, confers with staff as the panel examines the $1.1 trillion spending bill to fund the government for the 2016 budget year and extend $680 billion in tax cuts for businesses and individuals, at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 16, 2015. President Obama is expected to sign the legislation. (AP Photo/)

The White House and lawmakers of both parties grudgingly embraced a massive government-wide budget deal Wednesday combining more than a trillion dollars in year-end spending with hundreds of billions in tax cuts for businesses, families and special interests of every kind. Leaders planned to push it to final passage by week's end and quickly adjourn for the holidays, ending a tumultuous year on Capitol Hill.

The sprawling package will keep federal agencies funded through Sept. 30 of next year, staving off a government shutdown that was to begin next Tuesday at midnight under the latest in a series of short-term spending bills, this one being passed by Congress on Wednesday.

"In divided government, you don't get everything you want," new House Speaker Paul Ryan said of the 2,200-page melange of wins and losses for both parties. "I think everybody can point to something that gives them a reason to be in favor of both of these bills."

At the White House, press secretary Josh Earnest sounded a similar note, saying President Barack Obama would sign the package despite elements opposed by the administration. Those include a GOP provision lifting the 40-year-old ban on exporting crude oil from the U.S. and delays and suspensions of several taxes to pay for Obama's health care law.

"The president is pleased with the final product, even if it does reflect the kind of compromise that's necessary when you have a Democratic president negotiating with large majorities of Republicans," Earnest said.

Indeed, few ringing endorsements could be heard from either side for the sprawling package.

Despite pledges by Ryan to run a different kind of House after his predecessor, John Boehner, was ousted by conservatives angered over last-minute, dead-of-night compromises with Democrats, the new GOP speaker found himself asking lawmakers to endorse a huge, eleventh-hour deal of his own. It's stuffed with special interest goodies, presents for powerful lawmakers and provisions of obscure origin benefiting everyone from race car owners and many others.

He pledged to do better next year. And most Republican lawmakers appeared happy to give him the benefit of the doubt and say goodbye to a roller coaster of a year that included a near-shutdown of the Homeland Security Department and Boehner's chaotic ouster.

"There's a whole variety of things in there I define as very positive," GOP Rep. Frank Lucas of Oklahoma said after emerging from a closed-door meeting where Ryan pitched the deal. "Let the other side spin it however they want. I think the votes come together to pass it, and I get to go to my mother-in-law's Saturday morning."

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called the package "a good compromise." But House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., was among those expressing outright opposition, arguing that the package of tax breaks estimated to cost $680 billion over the next decade was too heavily weighted toward corporations and "practically an immorality."

Yet House Democrats' opposition to the tax package was expected. Republican leaders expressed confidence Pelosi would nonetheless deliver the majority of votes needed to pass the $1.15 trillion spending bill, leaving it to GOP lawmakers to provide the bulk of votes on the tax package under a widely accepted calculus allowing certain numbers of lawmakers to defect on each piece in the House without threatening the overall package.

After years of trying, Republicans claimed wins by making permanent business tax breaks for research and development and for buying new equipment.

Democrats got permanent extensions of tax credits for college costs, children and lower-income families. In exchange for lifting the oil ban they won five-year extensions of solar and wind energy production credits plus a renewal of a land and water conservation fund.

Omitted were two major GOP goals: Language dismantling Obama's health care law and blocking federal money for Planned Parenthood, which would be certain to draw vetoes. Conservatives were also distressed at the omission of language clamping down on Syrian and Iraqi refugees. Surviving was widely supported language tightening curbs on foreign tourists visiting without visas.

And despite Pelosi's complaints, other than lifting the oil export ban, Democrats mostly carried the day in keeping the spending bill largely free of controversial policy provisions known as "riders."

Democrats managed to kick out more than 20 GOP-sponsored riders seeking to roll back Obama administration regulations. Efforts to stall Environmental Protection Agency rules on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, ozone emissions, mine cleanup standards and an expansion of the Clean Water Act were all killed.

Instead, Republicans won a repeat of old victories involving the lead content in fishing tacking and ammunition and language sought by Western interests limiting protection of the sage grouse.

"We do feel good about what we did get and would love to have achieved more," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told The Associated Press. "And it's going to take a new president of a different party to achieve what we'd like to achieve."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to White House, lawmakers hail year-end deal on spending, taxes
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today