The first year of the 110th session was lackluster, and that’s putting it kindly. They say in this town that politics is the art of the possible, but what distinguished the first year of this session – the first in 18 years controlled by the Democrats – was a significant ramp up in political sniping and near-tyrannical partisan management of the House by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), with little real leadership being demonstrated by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). On balance, the GOP didn’t go out of its way to be congenial to the new leadership, succumbing to the temptation to be spoilers rather than legislators. While House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) stayed in the weeds as Pelosi promised and then delivered only half a loaf on most issues, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Senate minority leader, seemed to take almost perverse glee in derailing just about any and all initiatives brought forward by Reid.
The five-week delay in farm bill consideration over how many and what type of amendments would be offered is a prime example of the Reid-McConnell tug-of-war. While Reid may have been trying to speed up the farm bill floor process by limiting amendments – and removing the opportunity for GOPers to try and undo what his chamber had done on previous energy, immigration, and tax rewrites – such agreements are usually worked out between the respective leaders away from the bright lights of media and Senate floor finger-pointing. McConnell dug in his heels and assumed the tiresome role of the minority bomb-thrower, dragging the process out until Reid yelled “uncle” and the process moved slowly forward.
So, in 2007, we got the respective chamber’s farm bills done, and now we’re about to move into conference committee action where we’ll rewrite both bills into something resembling neither original version. This is good news – hopefully – because both bills are classic examples of slapping together legislation just to get the half-plus-one majority needed to pass the bill; neither is the real reform everyone talked about a year ago, and both are chock-a-block with junk. Don’t forget, the House farm bill came within a few votes of being sent back to committee; the Senate farm bill became a classic example of “let’s make a deal,” with Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) accepting just about anything and everything – with a few tweaks – to get his bill done before Christmas. And President George W. Bush has threatened to veto any farm bill that resembles either chamber’s product.
Representative Collin Peterson (D-MN), chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, keeps saying he wants to finish conference committee by the end of January. This won’t happen for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is that neither chamber has figured out how to pay for the $286 billion farm bill package. The House package arbitrarily fulfilled its pay-as-you-go (“pay-go”) obligation of either finding new money or cutting old programs to pay for new initiatives by slapping a tax on the U.S. subsidiaries of foreign-owned companies while tinkering with offshore oil drilling royalties enjoyed by big oil. The Senate package cobbles together a host of tax incentives and other sleight of hand, most of which are designed to pay for a permanent $6 billion disaster assistance package to which the House version only gives a passing nod.
Payment limitations, disaster payments, program eligibility, conservation, and other distinct differences will need to be hammered out, and if there’s ever been a living example of the old axiom of never watching sausage or legislation being made, then the farm bill is it.
Another challenge will be both chambers’ attempts to pass comprehensive food safety reform – including an attempt to create nearly a brand new ingredient/product import system for all foods, feeds, ingredients, drugs, and devices – in the wake of 2007’s spinach, peanut butter, pet food, and ground beef recalls. The House has held several hearings in the Energy and Commerce Committee, the Ways and Means Committee, and the Agriculture Committee, with Representative John Dingell (D-MI), chairman of the energy and commerce panel, having floated legislation requiring user fees, port limitations for entry, certification of foreign food safety systems, and foreign exporters. The Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, or HELP, Committee has held only one hearing, but is now drafting legislation. Some want to restrict the food safety rewrite to Food and Drug Administration programs; others want to include all federal food safety initiatives. Some want multiple bills addressing specific programs; others want one single comprehensive bill. Given the success so far of other “comprehensive” bills, I’m guessing we’ll see one food safety package aimed at food and feed and another aimed at drugs and devices.
Pelosi, in her what-to-expect speech about 2008 delivered just before Christmas, proffered an olive branch of sorts to Boehner and his GOPers. She said her party has “rapport” with Republicans, and she’ll try bringing greater “civility” to the process in the House, giving a nod to the advantages of bipartisan legislating. Minority Leader Boehner acknowledged that usually, when you work together, you can get things done. But in that same speech, Pelosi laid out a game plan that looks oddly like the one she followed in 2007.
First, she wants to pass legislation to force President Bush to change his policy on Iraq. How many times does Congress have to suck time going down this road? Even the presidential wannabe’s recognize Iraq is not the top-of-mind issue among voters Democrats would like it to be. Also, let us not forget: This is a lame duck president, one who has nothing to fear from Congress and one who has demonstrated – finally – that he’s not afraid to veto just about anything.
In addition to trying to get a farm bill reconciled, Pelosi says she wants to revisit energy legislation. I’m speculating she’ll try and get enacted the $22 billion tax portion of last year’s energy bill that was dropped at the eleventh hour when it became apparent President Bush would veto the bill. I’ve just about forgotten how many “omnibus, comprehensive” energy bills Congress has done in the last four or five years. This last go-around was embarrassing for the Democrats. Both chambers had passed comprehensive bills, but the Democrats refused to conference on such things as tough mileage and fuel efficiency standards or mandates on how much electricity utilities had to generate using alternative fuels. So, Pelosi and Reid ignored the conference committee process and rewrote both bills into identical legislation – behind closed doors. What they produced was a good rewrite of the Renewable Fuel Standard to mandate specific amounts of alternative fuels other than ethanol, including various forms of biodiesel, to be used by big oil companies, and they finally hit on a fuel efficiency standard that was palatable. But in the end, Pelosi’s assault on various tax breaks enjoyed by big oil threatened to doom the bill, and in what’s becoming a pattern of behavior, she stripped the tax package out of the bill and settled for passing whatever would make it through the chamber rather than the package she thought good enough.
To get the farm bill, food safety, energy, and tax legislation done this year will be monumental tasks given sweeping reforms are an anathema to sitting politicians in an election year. They fear riling any segment of the voting populace, hiding behind the notion that with a new administration set to move into the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue this time next year, it’s only fair to allow that gang to put its stamp on such heroic efforts.
So, fingers crossed, here’s hoping Pelosi’s and Reid’s “rapport” with the Republicans and pledge of “civility” – along with McConnell and Boehner’s acceptance of the olive branch – mean some of these impediments will be overcome.
View from Washington - February 2008 Render