Senate Republicans are torn between accepting or rejecting the return of funds, as the caucus leans toward concerns about the deficit under the Biden government.
With House Republicans voting last week to join Democrats in Congress in support of returning federal spending, which allows members to secure money for specific projects at home, the Senate Republican Conference is now the only stranger on Capitol Hill .
But there are clear dividing lines on the way forward, with conservatives pledging to fight any decision by the leadership to return to the funds and the main appropriators signaling a willingness to engage again.
“I don’t know, it’s controversial here. We have people with strong opinions in both directions ”, Senate Minority Whip John Thune
John Randolph ThuneSenate Republicans torn apart by the return of milestones. Small towns are concerned with the redefinition of metropolitan areas by the feds. Republican Party legislator presents bill aiming at technology liability protections MORE (RS.D.) said when asked what his colleagues would do following the House decision.
Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell
Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnell Morning report from The Hill – Biden’s next act: Massive infrastructure plan with Senate Republican tax hikes torn apart by money back The memo: Trump struggles to stay relevant MORE (R-Ky.), During a recent interview with Fox News, he signaled that the members of his caucus would follow a hard line, saying that the brands were “very unpopular with Republicans”.
“I think we are not very excited. There may be some Republicans interested in this type of spending driven by Congress. It does not enjoy much support among Republicans, ”said McConnell.
McConnell was previously an advocate for ear tags, but he warned that, speaking across the bench, there was now widespread opposition. The Senate Republican Party banned appropriations in 2010, with Democrats following suit in 2011 amid pressure from then President Obama and House Republicans who, amid an increase in deficit concerns, focused on favorite projects .
McConnell’s assessment is supported by conservatives in the caucus, who are warning their colleagues against what they consider to be wasteful spending. The convention voted in 2019 to permanently ban funds after the expiration of a previous moratorium.
Sen. Ted Cruz
Rafael (Ted) Edward Cruz Morning report from The Hill – Biden’s next act: Massive infrastructure plan with Senate Republican tax increases torn apart by Trump money backs intensifies activities and claims power in the GOP MORE (R-Texas) considered the House Republicans’ decision to lift the ban on trademarks a “serious” and “regrettable” error.
“Trademarks have played an important role in the out-of-control spending we have in Washington, and they play an important role in the swamp entrenchment,” Cruz told reporters.
Conservatives have been sending warning signals for weeks, telegraphing their opposition to bringing back the marks.
Cruz was one of dozens of Republican congressmen who sent a letter earlier this month to leading Democrats on House and Senate appropriation committees urging them not to bring back the funds, saying the funds were “rejected as corrupt and wasteful. “and that it would be a“ Serious error ”.
A group of Republican senators also introduced legislation to permanently ban funds.
Sen. Ron Johnson
Ronald (Ron) Harold Johnson Senate Republicans torn apart by trademark returns Democrats look at the Georgia model ahead of the 2022 Senate race against Ron Johnson in his past false claim Greenland once went green: ‘I have no idea’ MORE (R-Wis.), One of the project’s co-sponsors, said he was “surprised” that House Republicans agreed to allow funds.
“They shouldn’t have done that. … This is not the right direction to go, ”said Johnson.
But support for the return on spending has grown around the Capitol, due to the belief that they could help garner support for major projects amid the growing impasse in Congress.
House Democrats announced last month that they were officially bringing the funds back, but there will be restrictions, including a limit on the number a member can request, the requirement to post it online and a ban on members asking for money if they have a connection. with a project.
Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee Patrick Leahy
Patrick Joseph LeahySenate Republicans torn apart by the return of fund brands Lobbyists eager to return to fund brands MORE (D-Vt.) He indicated that he was also interested in resuming the practice – with or without Republicans.
“I am perfectly willing to have designated expenses. It would not be a large amount of money. I am perfectly willing to divide it evenly between Republicans and Democrats. And then it will be up to them if they want, ”said Leahy.
“If they don’t, we will only have it on the Democratic side. But I think many of them would like to have it on both sides, ”he added.
Some Republicans have signaled openness to allow ear tags, with some caveats.
Sen. Susan Collins
Susan Margaret Collins Senate Republicans are divided on how to return their funds Conclusion Meet the Make the Senate Great Again convention MORE (Maine), a moderate Republican Senator and member of the Appropriations Committee, told reporters recently that she would be open to bringing back the marks.
“The secret of expenses directed by Congress is that they must be disclosed. The sponsor’s names must be attached. It should not be dropped at a conference, ”said Collins.
“Why Congress has always wanted to give its spending authority to people who are not elected and are not responsible for these decisions, that is beyond me,” she added.
Sen. Richard Shelby
Richard Craig Shelby The Hill Morning Report – Biden’s Next Act: Massive Infrastructure Plan with Tax Raises Republicans Senate Torn for Money Back Mo Brooks Launches Alabama Senate Candidate MORE (Ala.), The lead Republican on the Appropriations Committee, is in talks with Leahy about how this would work. He said it is “taken for granted” that spending driven by Congress previously helped facilitate the approval of government funding bills, but warned that Congress will have to be careful not to “misuse” them.
“It must be just meritorious, substantive in nature,” said Shelby. “If you find projects that are really good and meaningful for various states and their communities, this is different. But I think you have to look at the merits. ”
“I think we have a constitutional right to do that,” added Shelby, “to control the money.”