Members of the House Freedom Caucus (HFC) aim to limit discretionary spending to $1.471 trillion and are not afraid to trigger a government shutdown in order to reach that goal.
The staunchly conservative Republicans announced their intention at a July 25 press conference on Capitol Hill, just ahead of expected votes on the first two appropriations bills for the 2024 fiscal year.
“The American people gave us the majority back in November because we ran on fiscal responsibility,” said Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.).
“We are committed to using every tool at our disposal to going back to the $1.471 [trillion] pre-COVID level of spending for non-defense discretionary, and allowing defense to stay at the current levels.”
The declaration came one day after the White House Office issued statements saying that President Joe Biden would veto the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill and the Agriculture appropriations bill if they reach his desk, citing concern over spending cuts that would impact clean energy initiatives and social programs that many Americans rely on.
Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) asserted the HFC’s exact intention is to attack Mr. Biden’s social agenda, especially as it intersects with military spending.
“We ought to be spending money for ships, for planes, for cyber security, not for transgender surgeries, not for puberty blockers, not for the woke problems of diversity, equity, and inclusion,” Mr. Norman said.
The impending battle places House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) in the position of having to move 12 appropriations bills through the House in the 16 legislative days remaining in the fiscal year over opposition from a sizable minority within his own party.
Debt Ceiling Deja Vu
The looming battle over the 2024 federal budget mirrors the one recently concluded over raising the nation’s debt ceiling.
After a months-long standoff between the president and the speaker, the two forged a deal that would increase the debt ceiling through January 2025 in exchange for cutting federal discretionary spending to slightly below the 2023 level.
That agreement was codified in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which passed both chambers of Congress with bipartisan support. The president signed the bill into law on June 3. Mr. McCarthy and House leaders claimed victory for having wrangled spending cuts from the president.
However, the deal frustrated many Republicans, 71 of whom voted against it.
Now many of those dissenters are waging the same battle to reduce spending to the 2022 level through the appropriations process.
Earlier this month 20 members of the House Freedom Caucus wrote to Mr. McCarthy saying they would oppose any bill that raised non-defense discretionary spending above $1.471 trillion, the amount budgeted in 2022. They repeated that vow on July 25.
The Twenty, as some of the hardliners refer to themselves, can exercise outsized influence over Mr. McCarthy and fellow Republicans because the GOP holds only a slim majority in the House.
Mr. McCarthy, who has won a series of legislative battles against seemingly long odds, told The Epoch Times he is confident that all 12 appropriations bills will pass the House despite challenges from within his own party.
Asked the reason for his confidence, Mr. McCarthy, who relishes the role of underdog, said, “Because I went 15 rounds to win the speakership, and I didn’t lose there. Because you thought I couldn’t get the debt ceiling done, because you didn’t think I could get the [National Defense Authorization Act], because you didn’t think I’d get the Parents Bill of Rights done. You’re asking the same question every week, and I haven’t changed my mind.”
The January Promise
The hardliners say the cuts they propose are modest, given the scope of federal spending, and are in keeping with Republican priorities. And Mr. McCarthy entered an agreement with them in January to make this spending reduction, the holdouts say.
Mr. McCarthy’s election as speaker on Jan. 7 required 15 ballots over nearly five days, a near record. It was achieved only after he made concessions to a small group of Republicans who initially opposed him.
“Back in January, when this new Congress formed, when we voted in a speaker, there was an agreement to go back to pre-COVID-level spending for non-defense discretionary spending,” Mr. Good said.
Those cuts were included in the Limit, Save, Grow Act, which House Republicans passed in April. The bill would have reduced federal spending in 2024, capped spending growth for 10 years, increased work requirements for some recipients of social services, taken back unspent COVID-19 funds, and loosened permitting requirements for oil and gas.
Now the group is trying to hold Mr. McCarthy to his original agreement and keep faith with the voters who sent them to Washington.
“The Republican approach to appropriations bills ought to implement Republican priorities, reversing the reckless, harmful, dangerous policies of the administration and take a step towards putting us on a path to fiscal responsibility,” Mr. Good said.
Eye on the Process
Given the short time remaining to pass the dozen required appropriations bills, HFC members are concerned that House leaders may use the legislative process to hamper their efforts.
The group called on House leaders to allow adequate time for members to study the bills before voting on them.
“They’re going to try to put push through two [bills] this week,” said Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.). “But we haven’t seen the language. They promised us 72 hours, and they need to deliver on that as well.”
The 72-hour rule was agreed to by Mr. McCarthy at the time of his election as speaker. It guarantees a minimum of 72 hours between the introduction of a bill and a vote on the House floor.
When the bills are available for review, HFC members will ensure that, in addition to meeting the spending cap of $1.471 trillion, they do not force taxpayers to fund activities or programs that they find morally objectionable or unfair.
Others are concerned that a slow drip of bills will prevent members from knowing the total spending being authorized until the very end of the process.
“If the leadership believes that they’re going to be able to trickle these out two at a time, three a week or two a week, that’s just not going to be feasible,” Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) said during the press conference.
“Because we will never be able to see what the total spending is until the very end,” he added. That might require an inordinately large cut to the last spending bill in order to achieve the overall target reduction.
Members are also skeptical of resorting to a massive spending bill, known as an omnibus, which lumps all spending bills together, making it difficult to propose changes. And they are opposed to a continuing resolution, which would allow spending to continue at current levels as the budget process drags into the new fiscal year.
“My biggest concern is that they’re going to cram through a couple of mini-buses and a [continuing resolution],” said Mr. Biggs. “And then you’re in for a world of hurt because there’ll be a lot of pressure to do something particularly onerous.”
If the appropriations process cannot be completed by Sept. 30, a partial government shutdown could follow.
That prospect does not appear to concern Mr. Good, who noted that essential services, which comprise 85 percent of government activity, would continue.
“Most of the American people won’t even miss it if the government is shut down temporarily,” he said.
Republican Priorities
When the appropriations bills are available for review, HFC members intend to ensure that they reflect Republican priorities beyond simply cutting total spending.
“What people do with their own dollars and the decisions they make about their life is their business,” Mr. Rosendale later told NTD, sister media to The Epoch Times.
“When you ask taxpayers to pay for abortion, when you ask taxpayers to pay for transgender reassignment surgeries or treatments, when you ask taxpayers to subsidize corporations because they go along with the Green New Deal programs . . . They expect us to remove all of that,” he said.
Though the president has threatened to veto bills that defund his environmental and social agenda, Mr. Good believes the budget process could produce a big win for the small Republican majority in the House.
“Our speaker has an opportunity to be a transformational, historical speaker that stared down the Democrats, that stared down the free-spenders, that stared down the president and said, ‘No, we’re going to do what the American people elected us to do,” Mr. Good said.
“And the House is going to say, ‘No, we’re going to pass a good Republican bill out of the House and force the Senate and the White House to accept it, or we’re not going to move forward.”
Jackson Richman and Melania Wisecup contributed to this story.
From The Epoch Times
