2013: Schweikert Voted To Fund The Federal Government For The Remainder Of FY 2013, Mostly At FY 2012 Levels. In March 2013, Schweikert effectively voted for a bill that funded federal government operations through the end of fiscal year 2013, by voting to agree with the changes made by the Senate. According to Congressional Quarterly, the Senate version of the bill that the House was voting on "would provide continuing appropriations through fiscal 2013 for government operations, including $1.043 trillion in discretionary funds before sequestration. It would provide $517.7 billion in base discretionary funding for the Defense Department and $71.9 billion for veterans programs and military construction as well as $20.5 billion for agriculture programs, $39.6 billion for the Department of Homeland Security, and $50.2 billion for commerce, law enforcement and science programs. It would fund all other departments and agencies at their fiscal 2012 enacted levels, with adjustments for certain programs. As amended, it also would add $55 million to the Agriculture Department's Food Safety and Inspection Service, offset by decreases of $25 million from a school equipment grant program and $30 million from funding for deferred maintenance on USDA facilities." The vote was on agreeing to the Senate's amendments to the House's original bill, which the House agreed to by a vote of 318 to 109. Subsequently, the president signed the amended bill into law. [House Vote 89, 3/21/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/20/13; Public Law 113-6, 3/26/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 933]
The Legislation Gave Managers In Federal Departments, Especially The Defense Department, More Flexibility To Carry Out Sequestration Cuts Making Them Less "Arbitrary" And "Damaging." According to the New York Times, "With the expected Senate passage this week of broad legislation to finance the federal government through Sept. 30, a lucky few programs will be spared the brunt of the automatic spending cuts now coursing through the federal government. Also, managers in some departments, especially the Defense Department, will gain more flexibility to carry out cuts. The bill is a mixed blessing for President Obama and others, especially Democrats, who hope Congress will eventually reverse the recent cuts. The changes make the cuts less arbitrary and damaging in the eyes of many independent experts. They reduce the effect on programs that touch national security, child health and welfare, but they inhibit long-term economic growth, through science funding and other areas." [New York Times, 3/19/13]
The Legislation Offset $250 Of The $333 Million In Sequester Cuts To A Nutrition Program For Women, Infants, And Children. According to The New York Times, "With the changes, the Agriculture Department's nutrition program for women, infants and children would receive an additional $250 million under the Senate bill, enough to serve 300,000 more people. That sum would help offset a $333 million sequester cut that the program must absorb over the next six months. The remaining cuts could still hurt, but officials involved in the program are holding off final decisions until Congress acts." [New York Times, 3/19/13]
The Legislation Appropriated An Additional $90 Million For State Department Embassy Security After $79 Million In Expected Cuts. According to The New York Times, "The State Department's embassy security, construction and maintenance account had been girding for a $79 million hit. Instead, an additional $90 million for the rest of 2013 will leave the account slightly ahead of where it was last year." [New York Times, 3/19/13]
The Legislation Reduced Federal Child Care And Development Grants Funding Cut From $115 Million To $65 Million. According to The New York Times, "The federal child care and development block grant, slated for a $115 million cut, would lose $65 million instead." [New York Times, 3/19/13]
The Legislation Reduced Nuclear Weapons Programs Funding Cuts From $600 Million To $237 Million Offset By Military Construction And Energy Research Cuts. According to The New York Times, "The Energy Department's nuclear weapons programs, promised large budget increases to win Republican votes for a 2010 nuclear arms accord, will still take a hit under sequestration. But the cut would be $237 million instead of $600 million. In exchange, other programs would experience larger cuts. Military construction for barracks, schools and hospitals worldwide would lose billions of dollars. Energy research, already taking a 5 percent cut under the sequester, or more than $150 million, would absorb another $44 million loss." [New York Times, 3/19/13]
The Legislation Eased Sequester Cuts For The Defense Department And Head Start. According to the Wall Street Journal, "The compromise accommodated both House Republicans' desire to bulk up the Pentagon's budget for operations and maintenance, as well as Senate Democrats' desire to shore up domestic programs such as nutrition aid for women and children and Head Start, an early-childhood-education program. Even in such programs, the bill eases but doesn't eliminate the impact of the cuts, known as a sequester." [Wall Street Journal, 3/20/13]
The Legislation Included More Money For Customs And Border Agents, Disaster Assistance, And A Program To Blunt Cyberattacks And Foreign Espionage Offset By Cuts To The EPA And The Affordable Care Act. According to the Wall Street Journal, "The Senate bill also included more money for an array of programs that enjoyed bipartisan support such as customs and border agents, disaster assistance, embassy security, and a new program to blunt cyberattacks and foreign espionage. But to offset those increases, the bill squeezed other programs, including Environmental Protection Agency programs and an Obama health-care panel." [Wall Street Journal, 3/20/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Provide $984 Billion To Fund Federal Government For Remainder Of FY 2013 At Levels Allowed Under 2011 Debt Limit And 2012 Fiscal Cliff Agreements. In March 2013, Schweikert voted to provide $984 billion to fund the federal government through September 30, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill finances government operations through Sept. 30, the remainder of FY 2013, funding most of the government through a continuation of the current CR but also including full, detailed Defense and Military Construction-VA bills that have adjusted spending levels for programs in order to protect high-priority programs and better manage the sequester. The measure is written to provide full-year funding for regular FY 2013 appropriations at a total discretionary level of $1.043 trillion, equal to both the FY 2012 discretionary cap and the level for FY 2013 as set by the 2011 Budget Control Act and modified by January's fiscal cliff agreement. However, it provides that the across-the-board cuts required by the March 1 sequestration order subsequently would be made --- 7.8% for most defense accounts and 5% for most non-defense discretionary spending --- which would effectively reduce total FY 2013 discretionary funding to $984 billion." The House passed the bill by a vote of 267 to 151. Following House passage, the Senate passed a substitute version of the bill, which the House then approved and the president signed into law. [House Vote 62, 3/6/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 933]
Bill Came After Debt Limit Deal's Automatic Budget Cuts Went Into Effect, As Demanded By Conservative House Republicans And Eventually Accepted By The President. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Conservative House Republicans, stung over the fiscal cliff law that allowed tax rates to rise on higher incomes, in early January reached a deal with GOP leaders under which they decided they would rather allow the sequestration cuts to occur than accept a deal under which revenue is increased to replace the automatic cuts. Under their agreement, any extension of government funding beyond the [then-]current CR's March 27 expiration date would have to be reduced to a discretionary total that reflects the discretionary cuts to be made by the sequester. [...] With Congress unable to replace the scheduled cuts, President Obama on March 1 issued the sequestration order to cut $85 billion from FY 2013 funding. [...] President Obama on March 1 also indicated that he would be agreeable to a funding agreement for the remainder of FY 2013 that reflected the sequestration cuts." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/13]
Funding Levels Were Set At Roughly FY 2012 Level Of Just Over $1 Trillion, Then Reduced By Automatic Budget Cuts That Were Agreed To In 2011 Debt Limit Increase Deal And January 2013 Fiscal Cliff Agreement. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The measure is written to provide full-year funding for regular FY 2013 appropriations at a total discretionary level of $1.043 trillion, equal to both the FY 2012 discretionary cap and the level for FY 2013 as set by the 2011 Budget Control Act and modified by January's fiscal cliff agreement. However, it provides that the across-the-board cuts required by the March 1 sequestration order subsequently would be made --- 7.8% for most defense accounts and 5% for most non-defense discretionary spending --- which would effectively reduce total FY 2013 discretionary funding to $984 billion." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/13]
Bill Adjusted Spending Levels For Individual Defense, Military Construction And Veterans Programs To Effectively Transfer Automatic Budget Cuts On Higher-Priority Programs To Other Programs In Same Category. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill "includ[ed] full, detailed Defense and Military Construction-VA bills that have adjusted spending levels for programs in order to protect high-priority programs and better manage the sequester." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/13]
Bill Funded Other Activities And Programs At FY 2012 Levels, Eliminating 0.6 Percent Increase That A Previous Continuing Resolution Provided; Automatic Budget Cuts Would Have Then Reduced Funding By An Additional Five Percent. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The bill generally funds all those other government departments and agencies for FY 2013 at their FY 2012 enacted levels. To date, the existing six-month continuing resolution has been funding the government at a slightly higher annual rate, with most accounts receiving a 0.6% boost. The measure effectively eliminates that increase, while also providing adjustments (so-called 'anomalies') to increase or decrease funding for certain specified programs and activities. Almost all of the FY 2013 funding provided by the measure subsequently would be reduced across-the-board as required by the sequestration ordered by President Obama on March 1; the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimates that nondefense discretionary accounts subject to sequestration will be reduced by 5%. The annual appropriations bills that would be funded through this extended CR are: Agriculture; Commerce-Justice-Science; Energy-Water; Financial Services; Homeland Security; Interior-Environment; Labor-HHS-Education; Legislative Branch; State-Foreign Operations; and Transportation-HUD. It does not, however, continue certain FY 2012 disaster relief funding included in the FY 2012 Agriculture, Commerce and Transportation spending bills, or that provided for the Corps of Engineers in the 2012 Disaster Relief Appropriations Act." [Congressional Quarterly, 3/6/13]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Reinstate The Federal Debt Limit Immediately, Which Would Block Any Further Government Borrowing And Return The U.S. To The Brink Of Default. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for a joint resolution that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have "expresse[d] congressional disapproval of the president's exercise of authority to suspend the debt limit, as authorized under the FY 2014 Continuing Appropriations Act (PL 113-46). If enacted, it would [have] terminate[d] that suspension of the debt ceiling, placing government borrowing back at the limit and preventing any further borrowing by the Treasury." The House adopted the joint resolution by a vote of 222 to 191; however, the Senate, having effectively rejected its own resolution of disapproval the day before, took no substantive action on the House-passed measure. [House Vote 570, 10/30/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/28/13; Congressional Actions, S. J .Res. 26; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 99]
Resolution Authorized By October 2013 Debt Limit Deal, Which Suspended The Debt Ceiling Until February 7, 2014 Unless Subsequently Blocked By Congress. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The recently enacted debt limit extension and continuing appropriations agreement that reopened the government on Oct. 17 --- also known as the FY 2014 Continuing Appropriations Act [...] --- provided for a suspension of the statutory debt limit through Feb. 7, 2014. The law also created a mechanism for Congress to subsequently terminate the debt limit suspension if lawmakers approve congressional resolutions of disapproval and can muster the two-thirds majority needed to overcome a likely presidential veto." [Congressional Quarterly, 10/28/13]
Supporters Of The Resolution Said That Their Vote Was Not Pro-Default, But A Chance To Discuss Fiscal Issues. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Republicans said that the resolution signified why Congress should continue using regular debt limit increases as debates over spending. 'I want to be clear: this is not a resolution for default,' said Rep. Tim Griffin, R-Ark. 'This is an opportunity to talk about how we have got to, when raising the debt ceiling, deal with the underlying drivers of the debt.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/30/13]
Opponents Called The Resolution Reckless And Unnecessary, As Congress Had Recently Voted To Raise The Debt Limit. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., dismissed the resolution Tuesday as reckless and unnecessary. 'I would remind my Republican friends that two weeks ago, every Democrat and 27 Republicans in the Senate as well as 285 members of the House of Representatives already voted to do the right thing and pay the nation's debts,' Reid said. 'I look forward to quickly dispensing with this Republican resolution, which would risk America's economic security as well as a global depression.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 10/29/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Allow The Government To Borrow Over The Federal Debt Limit To Continue Paying Social Security Along With Payments Owed To Government Debt Holders. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "allow[ed] the Treasury Department to continue borrowing once the statutory debt limit is reached, to pay the principal and interest on government debt and obligations from the Social Security Trust Fund. It would [have] require[d] the Treasury Department to report weekly to the House Ways and Means and Senate Finance committees as long as the special borrowing authority is in use. As amended, it also would prohibit the Treasury secretary from borrowing above the debt limit to pay for compensation for members of Congress." The House passed the bill by a vote of 221 to 207. The bill was then sent to the Senate, which took no substantive action on it. [House Vote 142, 5/9/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/9/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 807]
Bill Forbade Borrowing Above The Federal Debt Limit For Any Other Purpose. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Under the measure, the Treasury could not borrow above the federal debt limit for any other purpose; all other government activities would have to be funded by general revenues as they are received." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/3/13]
Federal Government Projected To Hit Its Debt Ceiling In October, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Congress subsequently enacted the No Budget, No Pay Act (PL 113-3; see House Action Reports Supplement to the Week of January 21), which suspends through May 18 the statutory limit on on federal debt and has allowed the government to borrow whatever it needs through that time to continue fully financing government operations. [...] Under the No Budget, No Pay Act, the debt limit will reset on May 19 at a higher level to account for the additional borrowing that has occurred. At that time the Treasury Department will have to resume using extraordinary measures to pay government debts and finance government operations. Because federal revenues are expected to be higher, and spending lower, than earlier estimated, however, many budget experts now believe that the Treasury's extraordinary measures may last until October, at which point the government would default unless the debt limit is raised." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/3/13]
Republicans Demanded Spending Reductions, Such As Entitlement Cuts, In Exchange For Future Debt Limit Increase. According to Congressional Quarterly, " In return for eventually raising the debt limit, Republicans continue to press for spending cuts and "reforms" to entitlements, and have recently raised the possibility of pairing a debt limit increase with a process for enacting an overhaul of the tax code." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/3/13]
President Obama Said That He Would Not Negotiate Over Raising The Debt Limit, As He Did In 2011. According to Congressional Quarterly, "President Obama, however, says that unlike in 2011 he will no longer negotiate over raising the debt limit, saying the government simply must pay for spending decisions previously authorized by Congress. He also has begun discussions with Senate Republicans in the hopes of paving a path towards a 'grand bargain' on the budget where major deficit reduction would be achieved through a combination of spending cuts and increased revenues." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/3/13]
Bill's Supporters, Primarily Republicans, Claimed The Bill Would Remove Threat Of Government Default While Necessary Changes Were Made To Reduce Future Spending. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Supporters of the bill, primarily Republicans, say it will remove the threat of a government default and preserve the full faith and credit of the government by ensuring that the government's public debt obligations are paid. They say major credit rating agencies Moody's and Standard and Poor's have indicated that they distinguish between a failure to make a public debt payment and a payment on another government obligations, so allowing Treasury to continue borrowing to roll over current government bonds and pay interest on those bonds will make it clear to Wall Street and the world that no U.S. default will occur. Moreover, it also ensures that Social Security benefits will continue to be paid in full. [...] They argue that the government is living beyond its means, and that fundamental changes must be enacted to reduce future spending before the debt limit is raised further." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/3/13]
Opponents Said The Bill Showed That GOP Planned To Default, Seriously Damaging The U.S. Economy, While Attempting To Ensure That Foreign Bondholders Still Got Paid. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats and other opponents argue that the bill signals GOP plans to default on the full faith and credit of the United States, which could cause serious and lasting damage to the economy. They say Republicans make a false distinction as to what constitutes default, arguing that the market will consider the government to have defaulted whether it misses a payment on a Treasury bond or on a major government contract --- which could roil the markets, including by driving up interest rates on U.S. bonds and making it difficult to roll over existing debt. In 2011, they note, the market plunged and the government's credit rating was cut even though Congress enacted an increase in the debt limit that prevented any type of default. Opponents also argue it would be impossible to prioritize government payments of other federal obligations outside of bond payments. Treasury's system is designed to pay the 80 to 100 million bills it receives each month in the order they are received. If anything, they say the bill effectively prioritizes paying off Chinese and other foreign bondholders before paying the salaries of U.S. troops and the pensions and benefits of veterans. At the very least, because those non-bond payments could not be prioritized and would continue to be paid on a first-come basis as revenues become available, payments to the military, veterans and other high priorities would be severely delayed." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/3/13]
Koch Brothers Backed Organization, American For Prosperity, Urged Representatives To Vote Yes And Included The Vote In Their Annual Scorecard. [Americans for Prosperity, 113th Congress Scorecard]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Allow The Government To Borrow Over The Federal Debt Limit To Continue Paying Social Security Along With Payments Owed To Government Debt Holders. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "adoption of the rule (H Res 202) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill that would allow the Treasury Department, once the statutory debt limit is reached, to continue borrowing to pay the principal and interest on government debt and obligations from the Social Security Trust Fund." The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 226 to 199. [House Vote 139, 5/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 807]
2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Allow The Government To Borrow Over The Federal Debt Limit To Continue Paying Social Security Along With Payments Owed To Government Debt Holders. In May 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "Sessions, R-Texas, motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and the possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 202) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill that would allow the Treasury Department, once the statutory debt limit is reached, to continue borrowing to pay the principal and interest on government debt and obligations from the Social Security Trust Fund." The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 227 to 199. [House Vote 138, 5/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 5/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 807]
2013: Schweikert Voted For A 90-Day Suspension Of The Debt Limit; Legislation Was Known As "No-Budget, No Pay". In January 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that, according to The Huffington Post, provided for "a short-term suspension of the debt limit. [...] The legislation [...] will raise the debt ceiling by however many bills the government racks up over the next 90 days." The House passed the bill by a vote of 285 to 144, and, after the Senate passed it as well, the president signed it into law. [House Vote 30, 1/23/13; Huffington Post, 1/31/13; Public Law 113-3, 2/4/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 325]
The Bill Purported Not To Directly Increase The Debt Ceiling: Instead, The Bill Provided For A Temporary Suspension Of Debt Ceiling Enforcement After Which The Debt Limit Would Automatically Be Reset At A Higher Level. According to The Washington Post, "The House passed the bill last week, days after Republican leaders announced that they would not try to use the moment as leverage in their battle with Obama over the federal budget. But House leaders said that they would not vote to raise the $16.4 trillion debt limit --- a politically dicey move for which they have in the past demanded deep spending cuts. Instead, they offered a novel plan to suspend enforcement of the limit through May 18. Under the measure, the Treasury Department can simply ignore the debt ceiling and keep borrowing to cover the cost of federal obligations. On May 19, the debt limit will kick back in and automatically reset at a higher level. Treasury officials can then begin taking what they call 'extraordinary measures' to continue paying the nation's bills." [Washington Post, 1/31/13]
The January 2013 Debt Limit Suspension Delayed Conflicts Over The Budget Until The Following March. According to The New York Times, "The 285-144 vote staved off an impasse that could have put the full faith and credit of the United States government into doubt and potentially set off an economic disaster. Instead, the next Republican showdown with the president will come in March, when the subject will be across-the-board spending cuts first and a possible government shutdown by the end of the month." [New York Times, 1/24/13]
Speaker Boehner Convinced Fellow Republicans To Approve The Debt Limit Suspension By Promising Them Later Opportunities To Make Deep Spending Cuts To Domestic Programs, Including Medicare. According to the Los Angeles Times, "House Republicans approved a temporary suspension of the $16.4-trillion ceiling on the nation's debt Wednesday, allowing the federal government to continue borrowing through spring while Washington shifts to more ambitious budget battles. Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) convinced his rebellious majority to go along with the new strategy by promising them the opportunity in the months ahead to extract deep spending cuts to Medicare and other domestic programs. The approach was a seismic political shift for Republicans who in the past had pressed for simultaneous cuts, which House Democrats dismissed as 'irresponsible' and a 'gimmick.'" [Los Angeles Times, 1/23/13]
Republicans Agreed To The Debt Ceiling Suspension Because It Included A Provision Withholding The Salaries Of Members Until Their Chamber Either Passed A Budget Or The 113th Congress Ended In January 2015. According to The New York Times, "To give House Republicans a rationale for giving in on the debt ceiling after dropping demands for offsetting cuts, the House legislation included a provision that would withhold the pay of lawmakers in a chamber of Congress that fails to pass a budget blueprint by April 15. [...] The debt ceiling legislation --- devised with awareness of the constitutional hurdles imposed by the 27th Amendment on Congressional pay --- would impound lawmaker salaries until a budget is passed or the 113th Congress ends, whichever comes first. And it would not require the House and the Senate to come to a compromise on the two spending and tax blueprints, which are likely to be very different. That will be the really difficult task." [New York Times, 1/24/13]
House Republicans Argued That They Had Not Given In On Debt Ceiling Increase, But Instead Had Simply Moved Fight To Date After $110 Billion In Automatic Across-The-Board Spending Cuts Kicked In. According to The New York Times, "House Republicans say punting the debt ceiling to May 18 is not so much a retreat as a 're-sequencing' of the coming budget showdowns. House Republicans now take for granted that the first deadline, March 1, will come and go, and $110 billion in across-the-board spending cuts to military and domestic programs --- known as a sequester --- will go into force. 'The sequester is going to go into effect on March 1 unless there are cuts and reforms that get us on a plan to balance the budget over the next 10 years. It's as simple as that,' Mr. Boehner said." [New York Times, 1/24/13]