Government actions at all levels, combined with the virus itself, bear much of the blame for causing the financial disaster to families and small businesses across the country. Draconian shutdowns that seem to have no benefit in reducing the spread of the virus, as compared to states who are fully open, are the cause of much of the financial harm families are facing. Amazingly, Operation Warp Speed has produced vaccines, and we see the efforts underway for those who want to receive it to have that timely opportunity.

Now, the annual spending bill, often called the Omnibus, has been in negotiations since the late summer. Congress has been forced to do Continuing Resolutions (CR) to keep things operational since Sep 30, which is the end of the normal fiscal year.  (CRs or temporary budget extensions, freeze as is current budget items and their funding levels whether they are currently relevant or not; in my view an irresponsible way of long-term spending). I’ve been very clear that I view any coronavirus bill as disaster aid, not a vehicle for a long wish-list of other unrelated legislative dreams. So both big bills somewhat coincidentally being done now and lumped together have caused misunderstanding. The Omnibus bill was going to be the Omnibus bill and the Virus disaster bill its own disaster bill. Each was its own but for both being delayed, now lumped together, because of deadlines each faced due to lack of previous ability to find agreement and political dithering. 

Every spending bill Congress takes up is at best a mixed bag. There are two parties in charge of different aspects of government, each with quite differing ideas on how to budget and prioritize. This is all made worse by election year politics, divided government, where big spenders seek to continuously drive appropriations up, and a general divide in this country likely to a level we haven’t seen since the 1860s. However, in this case, President Trump, his negotiators, and Republican Leader McCarthy were able to force the big spenders to follow statutory budget limits that have successfully prevented major spending growth within normal budgeting. Inside those limits there are many items that I support and many items that I oppose in this bill. 

The problem with Washington is that if we do nothing, the spending continues on auto-pilot due to using the Continuing Resolution process. CRs have been in place since Oct 1, (passed October 1^st, Dec 11^th, Dec 18^th, Dec 21^st, and Dec 22^nd).  Unless we fully shut down the government, which is also destructive and ends up more costly to stop and restart, the government continues to spend automatically on all the of items we might like or others that may be outdated or useless. Our discretion to adjust, reprioritize or eliminate spending, ideally in a public committee hearing process, goes right out the window with more tacked on CRs. Yes, a CR can be ok if Congress is actually budgeting and hearing and listening, but just runs out of time. Perhaps then a temporary CR to buy a couple weeks is ok to finish a good process. Doing no Omnibus bill but instead more long term CRs means we can’t achieve reforms on spending. Plus, we end up costing the American people more than if Congress had planned ahead and passed a real spending plan. When Congress passes continuing resolutions, it means for example, that the military’s needs, such as starting to replace our almost timed-out big boomer submarines or keeping our other weapon systems current as deterrents, as well as major infrastructure construction projects and our highways — these all stall. This just increases costs while delaying completion. Stopping construction on a highway project or housing construction because contractors aren’t getting paid for an unforeseen time, demobilizing equipment and crews to other projects, then calling them back to reopen and restart is a loser for everyone. Or trying to plan the phase-in of the building and procurement of ten new nuclear submarines when the Navy doesn’t know if they will have the proper funding from one month to the next. 

So you ask why support this annual but late appropriations bill? I made that hard ask myself. It includes a lot of things that I dislike, and have legitimate questions on whether we should be spending your tax dollars on such. Much of the overseas spending is under closer scrutiny than ever and deservedly so. Americans are hurting fiscally and in morale. One reality is that overseas spending has been ongoing and is in every budget as part of what the State Department, the President, asks for. His negotiating team, headed by Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin knew full well everything that was in the bill, better than much of Congress until the last minute. Pakistan spending has drawn much ire as a remnant of the ongoing war, capturing Osama Bin Laden, and trying to leave Pakistan with some stability. Whether all of this worked is a subject of its own long debate. Spending there has gone down dramatically, especially during Trump years and will continue to decrease. Let’s remember too, that under a CR, the levels of spending don’t change. Here we were able to decrease it and move it elsewhere. (See the Pakistan aid table).

The Omnibus appropriations bill also does cast some of President Trump’s much needed reforms in stone for an additional year, which may not happen after January. It provides new funds for continued border wall construction, $1.375B, and protects Trump’s authority to use military and homeland security funds to build the wall. It prioritizes national defense and rebuilding our military after nearly 20 years of combat by building missile defense, new F35 fighters, additional warships and giving our men and women in uniform the needed raise we’ve been trying to finish for months. This appropriation bill also legislatively takes back $934 million for California’s High Speed Rail fiasco (something I’ve been working to eliminate for years).  This bill reduces foreign aid below 2017/18 spending and is with minor adjustments what President Trump asked Congress for in his annual budget request. Again, none of this would happen under a CR or likely wouldn’t under a Biden administration. One should thoughtfully ask before eliminating foreign aid, as many are calling for, what was its purpose and benefit to the US position to begin with? Trade? foreign military bases? Helping small flare ups in distant lands to not become big ones that affect our commerce, security, or increase terror activity? Or even cause our men and women in the military to have to be placed in harm’s way? Or now is some of this aid outdated, frivolous and not beneficial (See Foreign Aid Spending table).

This bill locks in the important pro-life protections both at home and abroad that President Trump and many of us have championed. In fact, this bill has a strict funding prohibition on any taxpayer funds to Planned Parenthood — a major win. It also bars the government from funding anti-second amendment activism and policies, something that will be important should Trump’s legal and political efforts on the election fail.  With this bill in place, Trump’s policies continue even under a Biden administration and Speaker Pelosi.

I had to make a judgement if this bill is somehow better than continuing the status quo of last year’s bill that includes much of the pork that I think is inappropriate and insulting. Had Congress passed another Continuing Resolution instead, money would still be heading overseas in foreign aid in the exact same amount as last year.  Given that it’s the same overall spending level, and this bill moves funds to more urgent priorities that help the country and the North State, like Sites Reservoir, forest thinning and firefighting, additional flood control, rural broadband, help for family farmers and ranchers, and funds better veterans care, it’s better than last year’s plan in those ways. Importantly, this bill protects law enforcement by ensuring full funding to federal, state and local police and ends the Democrats’ defunding of police efforts that they pushed in appropriations bills over the summer. It also provides needed enforcement against illegal immigration. I encourage you to go to my website and see the long list of policy wins in this bill, including eliminating surprise medical billing that has harmed so many families.

There is also much to dislike in these combined bills. I could have voted No, and I strongly considered it. To me the $600 checks ARE inadequate… compared to a strong and free economy and full employment. The program funds $166 billion to kick out these $600 checks. I don’t think government borrowing double that to produce poorly targeted $1200 checks like last time, or perhaps more than tripling it to do $2000 checks, is an efficient or effective method of getting us back to where we need to be economically and as a free country. We will still have upcoming debate on that. I also want to make clear, there is no money in the Coronavirus aid bill for illegal immigrants, despite some saying there is.  I reviewed all of the language in advance, only citizens with valid social security numbers will receive checks, It’s still flawed but is tighter than when $1200 checks were flying out of DC. Also, despite what you may have read on social media, this bill specifically bars members of Congress from receiving raises. Most of the many pages of the large Omnibus bill had already been available in pieces to anyone- the separate, more routine, legislative bills had already passed bipartisanly in one house or another. The spending portion was debated in the summer, with some changes during the last minute but it all was agreed upon by the White House, Senate and House leaders and negotiating teams. Or there wouldn’t have been a vote at all until such an agreement by all sides. It’s still not an attractive process the way it all came together.

 

Omnibus Budget 1822 pages or 33%

Coronavirus Aid, 646 pages or 11%

Other Legislative Bills, 3125 pages or 56%

I hope those that typically agree with my views can see my logic within this strained environment. Those that are my detractors are never happy with my decisions and will criticize anything I do anyway. Perhaps future elections can cause more elected officials to be in charge who agree with what we are all dissatisfied with here. A strong majority that has the will to bring common sense to the negotiations and then vote to get this stuff out instead of splitting hairs, or, just paralyzing everything. A bill under a Republican House majority would’ve looked much different by eliminating many of those wasteful items. All of this legislation should have and could have been done separately and much earlier, but politics and gridlock got in the way. Negotiations with a Biden administration would be that much more difficult and costly. I ask you to look at my comparison graphics included here and decide if we did what we could in a Speaker Pelosi run House, during an extremely costly pandemic and a clouded election. I always will be straight with you and try to do what you would if you were standing in my boots with what I know at that time. Thank you for reading and your consideration, please pass it on to a friend!