|
 Unlike the knock-down budget battles that paralyzed government for
much of the year, this debate will largely take place within what
one lobbyist calls a "cone of silence" with Republicans and
Democrats aiming to minimize discord as they race to set spending
levels for thousands of individual government programs.
It's a chance for Congress to demonstrate that it is capable of
doing its job after two years in which lawmakers let the government
run on automatic pilot when they weren't shutting it down or
imposing indiscriminate spending cuts.
It has also touched off a lobbying blitz as defense contractors,
hospitals, day-care providers and thousands of other groups push to
maximize funding for the programs that affect them most directly.
Business groups will push to fund job-training programs, while
advocates for the elderly will fight for increased Alzheimer's
disease research and teachers' unions will argue to restore money
that has been cut from education.
There may be only so much they can do to influence the process as
lawmakers retreat into their chambers to write the complex spending
legislation.
"They absolutely know what our priorities are," said Beth Felder, a
lobbyist for Johns Hopkins University, the largest academic
recipient of U.S. research money. "At this point I don't think their
phones need to be ringing off the hook."
For some, it's a chance to restore funding that fell victim to
across-the-board "sequester" cuts that took effect in March. For
others, it's a chance to launch new initiatives that have been
sidelined for years as Democrats and Republicans have opted to renew
old spending plans through temporary "continuing resolutions,"
rather than write new ones.
At Johns Hopkins, programs funded through the appropriations
measures cover some hospital patients' medical bills and help
students pay for their education. Researchers build satellites and
develop missile-defense systems for the government and rely on
federal money to fund medical research projects.
Federal spending is far and away the most important topic for
lobbyists and their clients who hire them. Lobbying firms reported
working on behalf of 3,076 clients this year for budget and spending
issues, nearly twice as much as any other issue, according to the
Center for Responsive Politics.
Collectively, those lobbyists can claim a partial victory. The
budget deal that passed the House of Representatives and the Senate
this week gives lawmakers authority to spend $45 billion more than
would have otherwise been available.
RISING TIDE FOR INTEREST GROUPS
Now those interest groups will be essentially competing with each
other for a slice of the same pie.
"We cooperate because a rising tide lifts all boats," said Emily
Holubowich, who heads a coalition of 3,200 organizations that have
pressed for more domestic funding. "Then we're competing with one
another for those limited resources."
The deal provides a ceasefire in the budget wars that have consumed
Washington since Republicans won control of the House in 2010 on a
promise to cut spending.
It gives lawmakers on the appropriations committees $1.012 trillion
to spend, splitting the difference between the House and the
Democratic-controlled Senate.
It's not clear how that money will be divided.
Lobbyists say they expect it will be split evenly between military
and domestic programs, with the money being distributed
proportionately between the 12 subcommittees that each oversee a
portion of the government.
[to top of second column] |
But they're not likely to learn much more than that over the coming
weeks as lawmakers will try to keep their work as private as
possible, said Jim Dyer, a longtime Republican appropriations
staffer who now works as a lobbyist.
"If a decision gets out, there'll be five people to preserve it and
10 people to overthrow it. You have to be very careful about the
information that goes out in the public domain at this time," he
said.
Congress hasn't written proper spending laws for most domestic
programs since December 2011, opting instead to fund wide swaths of
the government under continuing resolutions that freeze operations
in place.
A CHANCE FOR NEW INITIATIVES
As a result, new initiatives have been put on hold.
Among them, for example, is a plan that would use advanced
molecular-identification techniques to identify and isolate
outbreaks of food poisoning, influenza or other public health
threats more quickly.
Obama requested $40 million for the program this spring, and the
Senate approved spending for half that amount in the summer.
Lobbyist Peter Kyriacopoulos brought in state and local public
health workers to pitch the program to lawmakers in March, and he's
following up with phone calls to staffers now. But he says it may be
tough to convince Republicans to sign off on new spending.
"The House has been operating in a very unique way, so we go in and
say what we can and we hope for the best," he said. "But no one's
told me to go away," he said.
Others are more optimistic. Armed with figures that show how many
patients in each congressional district have been unable to get
treatment due to the sequester cuts, David Pugach of the American
Cancer Society has been pressing appropriators to restore medical
research funding at the National Institutes of Health to its
pre-sequester level.
"When appropriators are making decisions based on what they say is
most important, funding for cancer research and prevention should be
at the top of that list and in all likelihood would do rather well,"
he said.
As the sequester forced sharp cutbacks in the Head Start early
childhood education program, backers across the country ensured the
cuts were covered in local media and pressured lawmakers to restore
funding. Hopefully, that will have generated enough momentum to
restore the $400 million that has been cut, said Yasmina Vinci of
the National Head Start Association.
"Our first, biggest, most glaring priority is restoring the cuts
that happened," she said. "I'm hoping we have done our work."
(Editing by Fred Barbash and Eric Walsh)
[© 2013 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2013 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
