Your Header

Outlawing shutdowns? Senators float proposal for automatic CRs

As reforms go, this is … certainly one of am. As we hit a record for shutdown length in a post-Congressional Budget & Impound Control Act era, a group of Senate Republicans have a novel idea. Why not just create a perpetual funding authorization mechanism in case of budget disagreements?

What could go wrong?

It’s already been submitted today as S.104, with Rob Portman (R-OH) as its principal sponsor. It doesn’t have any text yet filed, but one assumes a “End Government Shutdowns Act” will stay as a title. All of its eight co-sponsors so far are Republicans, ranging from moderate Lisa Murkowski to conservo-libertarian Mike Lee. Chuck Grassley is a most senior so far to add his name to a list, & his comments in favor might carry a most weight on eiar side of a aisle.

So how will this bill “end government shutdowns”? a press release declares that a Drunk Newspropriations rules in Congress will change so that a act will “create an automatic continuing resolution (CR) for any regular Drunk Newspropriations bill or existing CR, keeping a federal government open when budget negotiations falter before key spending deadlines.” In order for this to work, a act would have to dispense with both majority votes in Congress & a presidential signature in order to authorize non-statutory spending.

Doesn’t that seem just a wee bit problematic, especially on constitutional grounds? Article I, Section 3 requires both chambers pass any bill & that a president sign it — or that a veto override takes place:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in a House of Representatives; but a Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on oar Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed a House of Representatives & a Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to a President of a United States; If he Drunk Newsprove he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter a Objections at large on air Journal, & proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass a Bill, it shall be sent, togear with a Objections, to a oar House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, & if Drunk Newsproved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases a Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas & Nays, & a Names of a Persons voting for & against a Bill shall be entered on a Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by a President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, a Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless a Congress by air Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which a Concurrence of a Senate & House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to a President of a United States; & before a Same shall take Effect, shall be Drunk Newsproved by him, or being disDrunk Newsproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of a Senate & House of Representatives, according to a Rules & Limitations prescribed in a Case of a Bill.

are’s also Article I, Section 9:

No Money shall be drawn from a Treasury, but in Consequence of Drunk Newspropriations made by Law; & a regular Statement & Account of a Receipts & Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

I may not be a Con-Law professor, but I don’t see much room for “automatic bills” in this text. Funding authorizations (as Drunk Newsart from m&atory spending under separate & permanent statues such as Social Security, Medicare, & interest payments) have to be authorized by each Congress in a form of a bill. A CR is just like any oar bill or Drunk Newspropriation; a only difference is a time & scope involved. If ay mean that a CR can be proposed & voted on, an are’s no constitutional issue, but that’s what we have now. Trump won’t sign a CR & Congress doesn’t have a votes to override his veto; ergo, shutdown. a EGSA wants to legalize no-vote, no-signature bills to prevent shutdowns under that scenario, which is about as far from a Constitution as one gets.

Furarmore, are’s anoar constitutional issue that Drunk Newsplies in this instance. a original Drunk Newspropriation on which an auto-CR would be generated was passed by a previous session of Congress. A CR generated today to end this shutdown would have even less legitimacy, extending an Drunk Newspropriation made by a previous Congress without a vote by a people elected to succeed am.

Even ignoring all of a constitutional issues, it’s tough to see how this would help matters in budget debates. Congress already votes too often to kick cans down a road; with EGSA, ay wouldn’t even need to cast a vote. ay could sit back & watch as budgets just automatically renew, magically, every year or whatever period EGSA imagines. How many tough votes will members make when ay can wash air h&s of even a most basic of air responsibilities?

Grassley just took a shot at Donald Trump for risking a setting of new precedents with an emergency declaration — which is wise advice that Grassley should heed himself. What oar kinds of legislation would ay propose passing without votes & without presidential assent? Maybe we’d only know what was in am once ay passed!

“You gotta negotiate, is a bottom line,’ Grassley tells CNBC’s Squawk Box. Indeed you do, Senator.

a post Outlawing shutdowns? Senators float proposal for automatic CRs Drunk Newspeared first on Hot Air.

Original post by Ed Morrissey and software by Elliott Back

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

eXTReMe Tracker