When the $35.8 billion fiscal 2000 Commerce-Justice-State appropriations bill hits the House floor today carrying $4.5 billion in emergency funding for the 2000 census, Reps. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Mark Sanford, R-S.C., plan to offer an amendment that may make their fellow GOP budget hawks squirm.
The amendment would put members on record on whether to designate census spending as an emergency. However, the emergency designation has the reluctant support of most conservative and moderate GOP budget hawks.
The Coburn-Sanford amendment, to be offered during debate on the rule for the C-J-S bill, would strike the emergency designation and return the bill to appropriators to offset the cost. But earlier Tuesday, Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz., said most conservatives will not contest the census language because "we continue to see good faith" on the part of the leadership and appropriators to keep spending bills under the FY2000 spending cap. "I think it's a question of striking a balance and accepting a good faith effort," Shadegg said.
Moderate Rep. Michael Castle, R-Del., complained "we are getting freer and freer with what we call an emergency." But Castle said he would not offer an amendment to strike the emergency designation, citing the difficulty of finding $4.5 billion in offsetting cuts in the bill to cover the census costs.
Conservative Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., also said he could not find the offsets to pay for dropping the emergency designation.
Rep. John Sununu, R-N.H., said he would support the designation "because the consensus is that the expanded cost of the census and the fact that it wasn't included in the [Balanced Budget Act of 1997] constitutes an emergency. That's the choice we have to make."
Under budget law, emergency spending does not have to be offset and does not count against the budget cap. While the emergency designation effectively makes room under the cap for routine appropriations, it still must be paid for, out of whatever surpluses the government is running.
For FY2000, CBO projects a non-Social Security surplus of $14 billion, which the government can use to offset up to $14 billion in excess spending or lower revenues before dipping into the Social Security trust fund.
The GOP tax bill contains a $4.5 billion tax cut for next year, which if enacted would leave $9.5 billion of the on-budget surplus to absorb spending above the budget cap.
But with the House prepared to designate $4.5 billion in emergency money for the census, and the Senate considering between $6.7 billion and $10.8 billion in emergency aid to farmers, the on-budget surplus could be used up before either chamber considers the VA-HUD and Labor-HHS spending bills.
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., refused to be pessimistic, however, saying that "until it's used, it's not used up. Until it's signed into law, it's not actually gone."
In fact, the emergency census money may run into problems in conference with the Senate.
Although Senate Appropriations Chairman Stevens has said he will accept whatever emergency census spending the House approves, Commerce-Justice-State Subcommittee Chairman Judd Gregg, R-N.H., begged to differ.
Gregg said, "I think we should stick within the caps, it's spending above the caps whether you call it an emergency or not."
Whether the Senate does nix the designation, Gregg said, is "something we will have to take a look at as we move on here."
Meanwhile, the White House Tuesday said President Clinton's advisers would recommend he veto the House C-J-S bill in its current form.
A Statement of Administration Policy listed strong concerns that a variety of programs and agencies are underfunded.
Among these are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; the president's COPS program to hire new police officers; State Department operating expenses; international organizations; and the president's "New Markets" initiative, which would not get the $85 million Clinton requested.
The document is milder on the lack of funding for tobacco litigation, saying the administration is "disappointed" the funds are not provided.
The SAP does not explicitly reject categorizing some or all of the census as emergency spending. Instead, it states, "we urge the committee to work on a funding approach that is consistent with our proposal," which funds the census within the caps.
Keith Koffler also contributed to this article.