White House "deeply concerned" about GOP effort to avoid government shutdown

Without going so far as to issue a veto threat, the White House today issued a statement of policy declaring that it is "deeply concerned" with the bill House Republicans are drafting to avoid a government shutdown on March 27.

"The bill raises concerns about the Government's ability to protect consumers, avoid deep cuts in critical services that families depend on, and implement critical domestic priorities such as access to quality and affordable health care," the statement of policy says. That said, the statement said the administration is "committed to working with the Congress to address these concerns in a way that strengthens the middle class and helps to grow the economy."

Specifically, the administration says it is concerned that the legislation leaves federal agencies -- aside from a few like the Defense Department and Veterans Affairs -- left to operate at last year's spending levels, which, the statement says, "will impede their ability to provide services to Americans and efficiently allocate funding to key programs including those in infrastructure, clean energy, education, and research and development."

• Obama calling GOP senators to talk sequester fix
• Poll: Most feel sequester will personally affect them
• Complete coverage: The sequester

The statement said the administration looks forward to working with Congress to "refine" the legislation and will continue to work with lawmakers on a larger deficit reduction plan with which to replace the sequester.

The GOP-led House plans on considering the legislation tomorrow morning, before taking snow days on Thursday and Friday following an expected Wednesday storm. Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, unveiled the $982 billion spending bill on Monday. The measure would keep the government open and funded through the end of the fiscal year in late September. Current government spending is set to expire on March 27.

In an effort to ease concerns over the sequester's impact on defense, the Appropriations Committee attached to the legislation full spending bills for the Departments of Defense and Veterans' Affairs, giving those agencies some cushion and flexibility in implementing the cuts.

Some House Democrats plan on voting against the measure since it does not scrap all of the sequester spending cuts. Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, said today that she will vote against it, as did Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., and Rep. Joe Crowley, D-N.Y.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said today he was displeased with the GOP-drafted bill and that he supports Lowey as she urges colleagues to vote against it. Keeping the sequester cuts in place, he said, is "a punch to the solar plexus of American job creation."

However, Hoyer said he will not whip against the spending bill and was not clear on whether he would vote against it himself. He stressed that he wants to avoid a government shutdown.

While there have been complaints about the bill, members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have expressed a clear interest in passing legislation so that government spending doesn't expire on March 27, prompting a partial shutdown.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., today noted that "Senate Democrats are going to want to have some imprint" on the legislation and that the Democratic-led Senate should be in negotiations with the House over the bill.

"There's a sense of urgency and cooperation on both sides to get this done," he said.

[leitskevin]

So the GOP run house will again pass budget legislation, while the Senate again refuses to submit a plan, as required by law. As the Senate has neglected to do so for 4 straight years! And again, the White House will contribute only rhetoric. And yet every newscast will lead with the "it's those uncompromising Republicans" meme.

And the "cuts" are to return budget levels to the same level as last year. Oh, but what about the children! Planes will crash, armies will desert, schools will be abandoned to tumbleweeds!

[peter_out]

Obama should direct John Kerry to inform Egypt that the $250 Million that Kerry has "authorized" for Egypt to receive is deferred until such time that the U.S. Budget is balanced, and all those Americans that are losing their jobs as a result of the sequester get their jobs back, and the unemployment rate in the U.S. is restored to 5% or less.

That will be the first day Egypt or any other foreign country get their first penny of U.S. aid. Egypt, and the others, surely will understand.

[peter_out]

A local grassroots telephone canvas poll shows 92% chose "Chicken Little Presidentcy" to dscribe President Obama's performance. Everybody polled responded. One person chose "Don't Know" about the President's performance. One person asked, "Who's Chicken Little?"

[peter_out]

Let foreign countries apply and if qualified then pay cash in advance for U.S. military intervention. Let qualifying foreign countries pay for their own rebuilding and restoration after U.S. military intervention that they had ordered. If they can't rebuild themselves, they can try to hire American contractors, and if American contractors accept the work, they can pay cash, in advance, for the contract work.

[davidd5063]

GOP TROLLS, you will never be able to babble your propoganda on this board unabated by the truth. Stick to Fox News for your fantasy world, real Americans find you to be self-serving, bigotted terrorist.

[222tex]

David, Though I'm sure some people will find your retoric inspirational, do you have anything constructive or intelligent to add to the conversation?

[SeriouslySanDiego]

I wish the Administration folks would start showing some honesty and leadership, rather than repeatedly exhibiting the behavior of a 14 year old drama queen... Demonstrating more concern for country than political ideology would go a long way with the average citizen and show the President was sincere when he so often said "Yes We Can!" His constant blame game is making me regret I voted for him.

[222tex]

Well said. If the president has any hope of salvaging his legacy, he must show leadership in bringing the two sides together in compromise to address the runaway entitlement spending. Congress addressed raising revenue last month and now must address spending. Closing the White House to visitors won't cut it.

[sciline]

I know that there is a minimum 25 and 30 year Age requirement for election to the congress and senate, respectively. However, I was curious as to whether or not there is an unpublished, minimum, Mental Age requirement that might be in the 16 to 18 year old range?

[SPAMMER_REPUB_LIAR_ROBME]

If the GOP bill doesn't include spending trillions on big government and more social programs and letting our kids and grandkids pay for it on down the road Obama does not want it regardless if it reduces the deficit and debt and lets us pay as we go along, Obama will not want it and will Veto it.
Unless Obama is impeached, we have 4 more long years of this gridlock to look forward to.

[Xbeing]

Decency... the AP has been proven time and again to be selective with it's "fact checks". And even what you are citing proves the main reason, but I guess you do not understand the difference between "facts" and "opinions".

They also tend to overlook the obvious, in order to maintain their positions, once again, call to your own remarks, while in fact, the Congress does approve the amount given to the Executive Office for spending, they do not legislate How/When or Where the President applies the funding.

And last I checked, the Senate was Democratic controlled, and all proposals have to pass both Houses of Congress, not just the House of Reps. So if it has no chance of passing Senate, then what happened to it? If it doesn't pass both Houses, it dies, period!

Unlike the President, the House or Congress in general, does not ever utilize means to by pass the checks and balances of their positions.

As for the WH programs to assist struggling homeowners and Obamacare, keep your mind focused... right now, the individuals making $250,000 or more are paying 35% of their earnings to taxes, while those below are paying 10%.

There is only 2 ways to fund a program that has no draw of revenue, raise taxes or divert from other programs. The GOP wishes to divert from unessential programs, but the President would rather keep funding Planned Parenthood, and put the other programs on the chopping block.

Example, don't know if you get this or not, the total expense of all his and the first families vacations over the past 3 months would have funded the program to assist homeowners.

Another example? The President has authorized giving several Arab Countries financial support that is more than 3 times the funding for ObamaCare. One would think that his priority would be to his own program.

Simple answer, by allowing those to be the vehicle, he can get both. Citizens would not be upset, if they cut his funding for useless stuff, so threaten the things people might care about...

It's called Politics...

[davidd5063]

Once again XBeing, the ONLY source that has been PROVEN to be BOLD-FACED LIARS are your beloved Fox News. You may not like the fact that the jig is up for you worthless, self-serving psychopath TAKERS in GOP trollville, but the FACT is your "messaging" only works on the very bigotted and very stupid - which one are you X?

[freewillybird]

There will be no snow on thurs and fri, only on weds. congress should not take a snow day friday.

[Xbeing]

All of D.C. is, not just Congress. Supreme Courts are also going to be closed. The expected storm is huge and the purpose is to keep others in D.C. safe. Like the average citizen that would sit in the galleries, or report on the on-going day.

[johnlockesghost]

"...the administration is "committed to working with the Congress ..."---As long as the administration gets its way!

[RobertVBrand]

Boehner says government has a spending problem...then comes up with a spending bill.

[Xbeing]

Boehner is only one of 435 individuals... any bill that comes out of the House and goes to Senate requires 50%+ backing.

That is where negotiations take place, 435 people take to adding/removing/adjusting. When they do not agree, they vote, and majority wins.

Then the Senate takes it, and decides to rip apart the work of the House. If they make changes, it has to go back to the House... Goes back and forth until BOTH Houses of Congress approve, then it goes to the President.

That means 535 total individuals all get to express their opinions... kind of compare that to the posts on the average news story, and you might see the big picture.

Senators represent their States and House of Reps voice for the Districts (which typically 1, 2 or more counties of their state.

They do not represent the USA as a whole... That's the point, otherwise, the majority voice would win out every time.

Take history in example, women's right to vote, if majority won out, they still wouldn't be able.

Civil Rights? Yep, majority of VOTERS opposed. Heck, even Abolishing Slavery. Remember, many States objected so much so, they fought over it.