House Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) idea of introducing a temporary continuing resolution (CR) when Congress returns from its August recess to gain additional time toward negotiating a new federal spending deal is running into a vocal wall of conservative opposition.
When asked by The Epoch Times if he thinks that he and other members of the House Freedom Caucus (HFC) can defeat a CR, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) left no doubt about where he stands.
“Yes, we will. I mean, I can tell you right now this gravy train is going to end,“ Mr. Norman said. ”Again, we’re not even touching the interest on the debt; that’s going to exceed the entire defense budget of $832 billion in a few years.
“So, we are [going to fight it], and we will throw caution to the wind.”
“Passing a full-year [Department of Homeland Security] DHS appropriations bill without forcing the significant change necessary to secure the southern border is equally objectionable, even with some policy riders.
‘No Border Security, No Funding’
The letter concludes by saying: “Simply put, no member of Congress should agree to fund a federal agency at war with his state and people. We have a moral obligation to protect our states, our nation, and, importantly, the migrant children getting abused from the disaster transpiring at our southern border. No border security, no funding.”Other Texas Republican signers included Reps. Brian Babin, Wesley Hunt, Keith Self, Randy Weber, Beth Van Duyne, Nathaniel Moran, Michael Burgess, Michael Cloud, Lance Gooden, Troy Nehls, Pete Sessions, Ronny Jackson, Pat Fallon, and Morgan Luttrell. Only Mr. Cloud, Mr. Weber, Mr. Jackson, and Mr. Nehls are HFC members.
Mr. McCarthy mentioned the possibility of introducing a stopgap CR during his Aug. 14 conference call with members of the GOP caucus that controls the House of Representatives by a margin of four votes. Mr. Norman said that he expects more than enough opposition among the 42 HFC members to defeat a CR.
A spokesman for Mr. McCarthy notably didn’t take a stopgap CR off the table but declared the House speaker to be opposed to a year-long CR.
“House Republican appropriators have written their bills to reduce spending—in some instances taking bills back to Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 levels—and we are continuing conversations with all our members on ways we can get the spending in those bills even lower,“ the spokesman said. ”We hope to bring more of those bills—with additional savings—to the floor when we get back in session, and we hope to avoid a year-long continuing resolution that would lock Democrat priorities into place.”
At this early stage in the budget battle that has become, in recent years, an annual showdown on Capitol Hill, numerous House Republicans, including HFC members such as Mr. Weber, are keeping their powder dry for now.
“He doesn’t like what he is hearing but hasn’t made any decisions,” a spokesperson for Mr. Weber told The Epoch Times. “He would like to see what happens and what is included in a temporary CR, if that is the road we go down.”
Other HFC members such as Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) declined to comment “at this time,” according to a spokesman.
“A continuing resolution into December with no spending cuts and no policy wins is nothing more than business as usual in Washington,“ Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) told The Epoch Times. ”I am committed to at the very least reducing spending to the levels from last December as was passed by Republicans in Limit, Save, Grow.
“I am also committed to doing everything we can as a House majority to pass bills that implement the policy priorities that have broad support from the Conference, like H.R. 2 to secure the border and H.R. 1 to unleash American energy independence. We must demonstrate to the American people we are doing everything we can to fight back against the failing policies from the Biden Administration.”
Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) told The Epoch Times that “I do not support the idea of a stopgap bill lasting more than a few weeks.”
Mr. Good and Mr. Griffith are both HFC members.
A knowledgeable senior GOP aide described the present mood among HFC members as “just beginning to process what happened. They’ve been on trips, a number of them are on personal vacations, a number have big districts to cover, so there is no consensus. People are asking, ‘Are there conditions for the CR? What’s the time period covered?’ There are a lot of unknowns of what a CR could be at this point that members need to weigh.”
Mr. McCarthy’s position heading into September is complicated immensely by four political realities.
First, with such a slim House majority, it doesn’t take many HFC or other conservatives in the Republican caucus—such as those in the Texas delegation joining Mr. Roy’s “no security, no funding” demand regarding the border—to sink a CR if House Democrats also oppose the measure.
Second, Mr. McCarthy proved his ability to negotiate effectively in January’s momentous bargaining during the speakership vote, so the odds are that he can gain agreements with enough of the conservative dissenters to get an agreement through the House.
Third, the House agreement will have to surmount multiple hurdles in the Democrat-controlled Senate, plus those erected by President Biden.
Finally, there’s the investigation of the Biden family’s business dealings by the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, the House Judiciary Committee, and the House Ways and Means Committee. Mr. McCarthy has previously said—as evidence pointing to the president’s possible involvement in foreign influence peddling activities by his son Hunter Biden, compiled by the investigation, has mounted—that an impeachment inquiry could be on the horizon.
Should that happen, the budget battle could be lost in the headlines.
Meanwhile, Democrats such as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) observe the House conversation with a mix of pleasure and dread.
“I thought it was a good thing that he recognized that we need a CR,” Mr. Schumer told reporters during a media conference call. “We hope that our House Republicans will realize that any funding resolution has to be bipartisan, or they will risk shutting down the government.”
