House passes one-week budget bill; Obama vows veto

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

/ AP Photo/Charles Dharapak

Updated 9:37 p.m. Eastern Time

President Obama emerged from a meeting with House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid this evening announcing that no budget deal has been made, but that they are "further along today" than they were yesterday.

Obama is hopeful of a deal in the morning but said, "I'm not yet prepared to express wild optimism," reports CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller.

With a government shutdown looming, the GOP-led House has passed a bill that would fund the government for a week and also fund the Department of Defense for the rest of the fiscal year.

The measure, which includes $12 billion in spending cuts, passed 247 to 181. The vote was largely along party lines, though six Republicans opposed it and 15 Democrats supported it.

The passage was likely symbolic, since it is unlikely to pass the Democrat-led Senate and President Obama has vowed to veto it if it does. It appears designed to boost Republican arguments that Democrats should be blamed if the government shuts down.

In addition to funding the government for another week and providing $516 billion for the Department of Defense, the bill includes a policy provision that would prohibit federal or local funding paying for abortions in Washington D.C.

Republicans cast the measure as a "troop funding" bill and suggested opposing it meant opposing U.S. troops.

"If you vote against this bill you are voting against the troops who are engaged in three wars," said House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers, who introduced the measure.

Added House Speaker John Boehner: "There's no policy reason for the Senate to oppose this bill and keep the government running." House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said there is bipartisan support for the bill in the Senate and urged the Democrat-led chamber to take it up.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid countered that Republicans know that Democrats won't pass a bill that includes $12 billion in cuts they have not agreed to, as well as the abortion language. (Previous extensidons, by contrast, included $2 billion in cuts per week -- 1/6th as much.)

The White House vowed to veto the bill earlier in the day, calling it "a distraction from the real work that would bring us closer to a reasonable compromise for funding the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011 and avert a disruptive Federal Government shutdown that would put the Nation's economic recovery in jeopardy."

The administration says President Obama would be willing to sign a "clean" short-term budget extension bill "if negotiations are making significant progress." But Mr. Obama has made clear he is unwilling to continue signing short-term resolutions to fund the government.

President Barack Obama speaks after a meeting with House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., at the White House in Washington, regarding the budget and possible government shutdown, April 7, 2011.

/ AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

The president, Boehner and Reid held a meeting on the budget at the White House on Thursday afternoon, but they did not emerge with a deal.

"We're going to continue to work to get this done," Reid said.

The three men also met for close to two hours late Wednesday night to try to hash out a budget agreement to cover the next six months of federal spending.

House Republicans want the budget deal to include the $61 billion in cuts that exist in the budget bill they passed earlier this year, as well as controversial policy riders including provisions that would strip government funding for Planned Parenthood, EPA, Public Broadcasting and health care implementation.

Democrats say they are willing to cut $33 billion from the budget and have cast Boehner and the Republican leadership as unwilling to compromise because they are being held hostage by the Tea Party.

(At left, Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer argues that point to CBS News' Nancy Cordes.)

Reid said earlier in the day that all parties have agreed to certain level of spending cuts and that the negotiations are stalled over the policy riders that Republicans want to add to the bill.

"The only thing holding up an agreement is ideology," Reid said. "I'm sorry to say... that my friend the speaker and the Republican leadership have drawn a line in the sand."

An aide to Boehner told CBS News that Reid's assertion that the negotiations are stalled over policy riders is false. There is no agreement on spending cuts or policy, the aide said.

Without a deal, a government shutdown begins on Saturday. That would mean some federal operations and services will stop running. Hundreds of thousands of government workers would be furloughed, tens of thousands of military personnel would not immediately be paid and national parks some government agencies would be closed.

Government shutdown: What it means for you
Senator Joe Manchin: Don't pay us if government shuts down
Obama: Shutdown would hurt American people
DC rep: Gov't shutdown "equivalent of bombing"

[americanone005]

There is no debt of 16 trillion...is al smoke and mirrors...with the federal reserve, imf, gatt, wto, nafta....gt rid of all of them....return back to the greenback...as lincoln and JFK intended for us to do....you people need to wake up....Abolish corp they arent peopl never will be, abolish the citizen united...since the dollae isnt a vote...get rid of the lobbyist in D.C...get rid of pac...the only thing that makes debt is usury itself tend fold known as fractional reserve banking

[mask2697]

Washington was right! political parties was a horrible idea from the very start...

[sjc_1]

The Democrats could have authorized the budget spending last October with the majority they had. An election was coming in November, they knew they would lose the House, so they should have authorized.

[laurarcamp]

can someone please explain to me why the start of a government shutdown begins with national parks, military payhecks.... National parks actually bring income and jobs to government and the people of this country. The shut down should begin with the politicians that have put this country in this position. The first thing that should be shut off are the paychecks to the congress memebers. They are the ones that can not agree and because of that will cost this country to go further into debt. Please correct me if I am wrong, explain this to me!!

[hhandyman]

Republicans cant claim right to life if they are not willing to pay for medicare. Its abortion by euthanasia.. witholding life giving medications for the Budget ballance to end in the deaths of those that would of lived.. its Right to life.. so T PARTY If your for right to Life you cant be for killing Medicare. LIFE IS LIFE

[mask2697]

Republican healthcare plan: die quickly

[krisd999-2009]

Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic..33b, 60b, total puppet show. The deficit is 1.6 TRILLION in just one year. Why even bother..we are headed for total financial destruction. The Federal Reserve is "buying" 70% of the bonds, mostly everything we buy is imported, what happens if no one wants our freshly printed dollars? Short of 50%, at least, cut in all government, we are toast.

[skyviewperspective]

Let's take a step back and look at all this... there will be a shut down because one group or another WANTS to make a statement by the shutdown. It is no longer a govt for or by the people. The people controling this are answering to different interests.

From alot of the things I've been reading though, people will be "furloughed". What that means is the 'lesser' of the 'for the people by the people' will be sent home without pay waiting for their fate to be handed to them. Because historically a shut down usually means that when the dust settles, the 'lesser' or using their terminology 'non-essential personnel' will be reduced in numbers when the furlough ends. So it is an ease of conscience for the deciders to get rid of people they want to get off the payroll.

On top of that, take a look at the statements going around that military personnel will be working without pay. So you have young people out there putting their lives on the line that could theoretically make the ultimate sacrifice WITHOUT pay. That might be fine if you are fighting in the fields of Gettysburg for a more perfect union, but not when you are fighting for oil for the 'different interests'. I don't even want to get into the overfunded defense budget, that's for a different time, for now it is about young men and women putting their lives on the line.

What I AM missing is the furlough of these lawmakers. OR...them working "without pay". Their work is not putting their lives on the line. But further....if a person is furloughed (like the non-essential personnel) and can be relieved of their duties as a result, could we do this with the lawmakers? It seems that if you have employees (yes, elected officials ARE employees of the people) that can't accomplish the work they are suppose to be doing, shouldn't they be laid off and not return?

They SHOULDN'T be paid, they SHOULD be furloughed; and they SHOULD be replaced by their employers. They are not accomplishing what they should have accomplished 'for the people'.

We see it over and again by grocery and department stores when their is shoplifting taking place. The people pay the price. It is passed on to them....what is going on here is shoplifting. For example, the proposal of reworking Medicare. If you pay attention to the magic year once again it always seems to fall in to the baby boomer years beginning around 1957ish.

1957 - 1959 ---- Medicare goes away and you get a small stipend and find your own health care. So all these people who have been paying in to Medicare, are close to retirement (say 10 to 12 years) couldn't possibly adjust enough of their income to make up for what this will cost them.

1957 - 1959 ---- Social Security will be altered or eliminated beginning with this age group so that they get reduced benefits but the honor of working another two years for less benefits.

ALL of what is going on is shoplifting by the decision makers who should be 'furloughed' permanently.

[doctor_know]

The GOP tried this last time we had a Dem president.....

[nuttyworld]

This country has maxed out its credit card and now it is time to stop spending and start cutting. The bigger cut the better. Somebody in D.C. please tell Chuck Schumer that we all heard about the orders to blame the Tea Party. It is time to man up and put the blame where it belongs. If the govt. shuts down we all know that you didn't want to reign in spending but refused to listen to those who did.

[americanone005]

country hasnt max out any credit...that just a flaming lie made from nothing the federal reserve is made from nothing

[laxboy10]

(33 billion + 61 billion) / 2 = 47 billion

[dim_public]

This is precisely why you don't elect Republicans who hate government so much, to serve in government?.

Hating government is really self-loath?ing. In a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, it's really a hatred of yourself and of the world around you. They will take the chance to destroy the lives of working people just to uphold their ideology.