GovernmentExecutive.com

The Senate vote on Sept. 10 to provide $6 billion in drought assistance that the White House did not ask for and does not want is the most significant federal budget event of the year. It almost certainly means that Congress will not go along with the spending limits President Bush has proposed and that the 2003 deficit will be considerably higher than any of the most recent estimates.

Here's why:

At a time when everything that is happening on Capitol Hill is considered highly partisan positioning, this vote was overwhelmingly bipartisan - an unambiguous indication of Senate intent. The $6 billion measure passed the Senate by a whopping 79 to 16, with 31 Republicans joining 47 Democrats and 1 independent.

The 79 votes in favor of the $6 billion are significantly more than the two-thirds needed to overcome a presidential veto.

This was the strongest repudiation of administration policy on budget matters that has occurred since the president took office. It is as clear a message as could be sent that congressional Republicans - or at least those in the Senate - do not see their political futures as being inextricably tied to supporting the president's position.

The fact that this occurred almost immediately after the president spent a good part of August doing record-breaking fund raising for GOP candidates makes the repudiation more stinging - and significant. The vote also came in the midst of the year's first real push by the administration for spending restraint. This vote may have mortally wounded that effort.

While it happened with only 20 days left before the start of the fiscal year, the vote came before any of the 2003 appropriations had yet been approved by Congress. It will, therefore, be able to influence the budget politics and congressional boldness on all of the spending bills for the coming year.

Granted, $6 billion is not a large percentage of the total federal budget - but it is actually 50 percent or more of the total over which the White House and Congress had been expected to haggle in the 2003 appropriations fights that are still ahead. As a result, this vote significantly ups the ante and indicates that the White House will have to agree to more spending than seemed likely only a week ago.

The very large vote in the Senate probably means that senators will insist the $6 billion be specifically included in the continuing resolutions that are almost certainly going to be needed in October. This could make the CRs more difficult for the House to pass and the president to sign, and - although it is still far-fetched - that $6 billion raises the specter of an inadvertent federal shutdown.

All of which puts House Republicans in a very difficult political position. If they refuse to go along, they may jeopardize the election prospects of certain Republican Senate candidates, reducing the possibility of a GOP takeover of that chamber.

On the other hand, supporting the $6 billion drought package runs the risk of alienating the anti-spending voters who have been so instrumental in maintaining a GOP House majority. In other words, voting to help their Senate colleagues gain control of that body could cost House Republicans their own majority status.

Finally, the vote also puts the White House in a very difficult position. If it decides to maintain that the $6 billion is unnecessary, the president will be making life very difficult for a number of Republican incumbents and challengers - particularly in drought-plagued states like Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico and South Dakota, where Senate or governor races are especially competitive this year.

However, if the president changes his position and accepts the additional spending, he will further hurt the budget credibility he damaged by signing the farm bill earlier in the year; that measure included $20 billion more than he proposed. He will also be sending a strong signal that fiscal restraint can be set aside for powerful constituencies.

And, even during a drought, that will open the floodgates.

Question Of The Week

Last Week's Question. Last week's question asked Budget Battles readers to guess the number of fiscal 2003 appropriations that will be enacted by midnight this Sept. 30. We obviously won't know the answer to this question for several weeks so there is no winner of an "I Won A 2002 Budget Battle" coffee/tea/hot chocolate mug to be announced. If you haven't submitted an entry yet - don't. All responses had to be received by this past Saturday.

This Week's Question. Here's another appropriation question to tantalize you before the fiscal year starts. It is also another question that you don't have to be a budget geek to answer so it is a great opportunity to win your very own "I Won A 2002 Budget Battle" mug. The question: Which of the 13 regular fiscal 2003 appropriations will be the first one signed into law by the president? Send your responses to scollender@nationaljournal.com by 5 p.m. PDT on Saturday, Sept. 21, 2002. You must include your mailing address so the mug can be sent if you win. If there is more than one correct response, the winner will be selected at random from all of the correct responses.

Special Note: Begging and pleading will not help you win, but it will make the judging much more fun.

Galileo. Glenn. Armstrong. Kirk. And Collender?

Last January, National Journal, Government Executive and Fleishman-Hillard joined together to present "Three-Ring Budget," a half-day executive briefing on the 2003 budget debate presented by Budget Battles writer Stan Collender that used the sights and sounds of the circus to illustrate what was going to happen and why. At next January's briefing, "Houston, We Have A Budget," anyone and anything that has ever had something to do with outer space will be fair game as the new and starting realities of the fiscal 2004 budget debate are described and fully analyzed.

There will be substantial discounts for early registration, and group discounts will be available. Details will be provided next week, but please contact Beverly Campbell (campbelb@fleishman.com or 202-828-9712) with any questions in the meantime.