House Republicans Still Battling Each Other Over Budget

Rep. Ken Buck and his Freedom Caucus keep pressing buttons.

Rep. Ken Buck and his Freedom Caucus refuse to press the “compromise” button.

The so-called “House Freedom Caucus,” which counts Colorado Rep. Ken Buck (R-Greeley) among its members, is doing its damnedest to muck up the budget discussions in Washington D.C. As Politico reports today, the Freedumb Caucus is dead-set on holding the budget hostage — even if it means waiting until 2016 to approve an omnibus spending bill:

With government funding set to run out in just three days, divisions within the House Republican Conference are surfacing yet again.

Speaker Paul Ryan and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy are determined to wrap up a yearlong spending bill this month, but the conservative House Freedom Caucus is starting to suggest pushing the spending fight into next year. They say the holiday season time crunch is hurting the GOP’s leverage in negotiations with Democrats.

The government is slated to run out of spending authority on Friday and Republican and Democratic leaders are at an impasse over an omnibus-spending bill. At issue are several policy riders, including a proposal that would increase scrutiny of Iraqi and Syrian migrants. House conservatives are pushing to include that language in the spending bill, but the White House is opposed to it, despite widespread support on Capitol Hill.

Is this just another last-minute hissy fit from Tea Party Republicans, or are they really prepared to draw a line in the sand on the budget discussions? As Chris Cillizza explains in “The Fix,” the 2010 “Tea Party” wave year that swept Republicans into power also created an ideology immune to compromise:

Yes, the 63-seat Republican gain made Boehner speaker. But it also put him in charge of a majority that didn’t see the strategic fight with Democrats at all like he did. The tea party folks — led  by the likes of Labrador, Ohio’s Jim Jordan and others — rejected the idea that compromise was the only outcome of major legislative fights. Giving in — at all — meant surrender. And if Democrats knew that Republicans wouldn’t push beyond the long-accepted boundaries of congressional conduct, they could simply wait out the GOP until the party eventually gave in.

Think of it this way: Boehner was okay with taking a hostage to use as a negotiating tool. But he was never going to shoot the hostage. The Freedom Caucus view was — and is — that you MUST be willing to shoot the hostage — and make sure the other side knows that — going into the negotiation. [Pols emphasis]

Anybody still wondering why Paul Ryan was so reluctant to stand for Speaker of the House?

16 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. TobiasFunke says:

    A pretty good #LongRead from The New Yorker on the Freedumbers and their "politics before people" mantra. 

  2. FrankUnderwood says:

    D.J. Paulie Ryan's beard is going to turn gray really quickly………….

  3. Moderatus says:

    NO compromise on conservative principles.

    • Socialisticat says:

      Now all you need to do is find one.

    • Republican 36 says:

      Since you believe no one should compromise their principles, in turn you agree the Tuesday Group of moderate House Republicans should stand by their principles too? Right? And therefore, if they did that and by doing that they passed legislation by voting with the House Democrats, you wouldn't have a problem with that because of course they stood by their principles. Right?

    • Curmudgeon says:

      GOP Uber Alles! 

    • Conserv. Head Banger says:

      What conservative principles?

      • Davie says:

        Get the Kenyan Muslim out of the White House is about the only one I can come up with.

      • Diogenesdemar says:

        Keeping one's head firmly tucked upside one's ass, would be my guess.

      • BlueCat says:

        The ones that define the self proclaimed conservative elected Republicans of the 21st century GOP. Modster simply channels them.

        Sorry CHB. You and your like minded friends are the outlers. Modster, on the other hand, is completely in step with every single Republican self described conservative majority (which means every Republican majority period) legislative body, state and federal. So should we accept that, for all practical purposes conservatism is what the overwhelming majority of elected Republicans individually and all Republican majority legislative bodies collectively say it is or what you and your hardy little band with no influence whatsoever in today's GOP politics say it is? Rhetorical of course.

        Which is why just saying no to Republican candidates, every one of them in all circumstance, is the only way to go.

        • Conserv. Head Banger says:

          Sorry back blue cat. I keep trying to help you through this mindset and will make progress, slowly but surely. Looking ahead, precinct caucuses are in February, I think. Depending on dates, I'll try to become a delegate to my county assembly. That will be fun.

          And may I assume that you'll be joining me at committee hearings for Tim Neville's ban-all-abortions bill that is a strong likelihood to be re-introduced?

          My appearance, again, depends on schedule.

          • BlueCat says:

            First show me a Republican majority legislative body that does not behave exactly as I say majority Republican legislative bodies behave. Give me a piece of legislation out of any one of  our country's many Repubican majority state legislatures or our Republican majority House or Senate that contradicts my contention.  Then we'll talk.

  4. Wong21fr says:

    Party before Country, eh Mod?  Mao and Stalin would be proud.



  5. MADCO says:

    Shut it down. Sooner is better. Keep it closed as long as possible. Cuz…Freedom!

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.