WASHINGTON -- Congress got down to the business of budgeting this week, sealing a deal in the wee hours of Friday morning that will clear the decks for the remainder of President Barack Obama's second term.
The major deal -- which split support of Alaska's all-Republican congressional delegation -- lifts the threats of a debt default and government shutdown until March 2017. But the details of how the budget will ultimately be divided still lie ahead.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski was the only Alaska member to vote in favor of the bill, citing a chance to end a yearslong budget standoff in the nation's capital, albeit with an "imperfect plan." Sen. Dan Sullivan and Rep. Don Young voted against the plan, with Sullivan citing spending boosts and Young citing concerns about lifting the debt ceiling and selling off oil reserves.
The deal represented the parting masterstroke of now-former House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who stepped down after being continually stymied by the tea party-driven House Freedom Caucus. Boehner negotiated the deal with Democrats and the White House, and secured the "aye" vote of incoming Speaker Paul D. Ryan, R-Wis.
The bill passed the House late Wednesday by a vote of 266-147, with just 79 Republicans backing the leadership.
Young decided he could not join them.
"Like many of my colleagues, I have concerns with a carte blanche suspension of the nation's debt limit and the speculative offsets proposed to pay for this plan, including a sell-off of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve," Young said in a statement.
"While I believe defaulting on our debt is both irresponsible and reckless, I also believe as a nation we must not give up on addressing federal spending and the leading causes of our spiraling debt," Young said.
The budget bill would lift sequester spending caps that have, in particular, hamstrung military spending. It includes $80 billion in new funds, offset by spending cuts and boosted revenue from tighter tax rules for business partnerships and selling off oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
The deal would sell 58 million barrels of oil out of the Louisiana and Texas reserves between 2018 and 2025 to help pay for the budget deal. Just how much money would come from the deal was not immediately apparent, but the multiyear lag may show hope for higher prices. Prior budget efforts have assumed the government could sell the reserve oil for about $90 a barrel, roughly twice the current going price.
Murkowski, chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has long expressed concerns about selling off oil reserves for reasons other than energy security. Earlier in the week, Murkowski's committee spokesman Michael Tadeo said the senator was still examining implications of the oil sales wrapped up in the deal.
But in the end, she decided to set those concerns aside in the interest of avoiding seeing the U.S. default on its existing debts, making changes to Medicare and Social Security and removing the threat sequestration poses to the military budget.
Murkowski cited her long-standing position that Strategic Petroleum Reserve sales should be focused on energy security. "To that extent, I am pleased to see that the budget agreement directs $2 billion toward the repair and improvement of the SPR itself," she said.
"While there is a real limit to the amount of oil we can sell from the SPR, the language in the budget deal protects our ability to meet our international obligations, but we need to be vigilant that the SPR not drop below the level that would endanger our energy security."
Sullivan disagreed with Murkowski's estimate of the bill's value and voted against it. The bill passed the Senate at about 3 a.m. Eastern time by a vote of 65-35. All 35 no votes came from Republicans.
"I voted against this bill for a number of reasons," Sullivan said. "It spends too much on growing federal agencies like the EPA, IRS and the Department of the Interior, and spends too little on our nation's defense and the brave young men and women who serve in our military.
"It also does nothing to grow the economy -- which grew at an anemic 1.5 percent rate last quarter."
And Sullivan argued that the spending is upfront but savings come too far in the future, which he said could bring the national debt to more than $20 trillion in the next two years.
The current U.S. national debt -- the amount owed by the federal government -- is just short of $18.5 trillion.
Murkowski said the bill is "an imperfect plan" but prevents a government shutdown. She said she "reluctantly voted" for the bill "because it provides relief from the financial brinkmanship. … In less than a week, our nation's treasury would be unable to pay its bills without this deal. Defaulting on our obligations is something I simply cannot accept."
And she cited "positive changes to Medicare and Social Security" that would reduce government spending.
Obama said the same provisions would avoid "harmful cuts to Medicare and Social Security."
The budget agreement would limit premium increases for some Medicare Part B beneficiaries and halt cuts to Social Security Disability Insurance benefits, moves backed by other cost-saving measures.
While Sullivan said the military spending wasn't high enough, Murkowski argued that the agreement's provisions lifting sequestration spending caps "provides desperately needed stability to our military leaders, making it possible for the Armed Forces to confidently move forward with critical projects like the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and the Missile Defense Agency's Long Range Discrimination Radar and makes the investments needed to improve combat readiness."
What comes next remains the key question for Congress -- allocating the details of the grand budget deal will require either passing 12 individual spending bills or one major omnibus bill, the preferred mechanism in recent years.
In recent months, Democratic filibuster efforts have stymied Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky in efforts to move spending bills that have already passed out of committee.
The question is not whether Democrats will follow through on Minority Leader Harry Reid's pledge to allow the appropriations bills to move forward. And that's largely tied to just how set Republicans are on including a broad array of policy "riders" that their opponents consider non-starters.
"This agreement is a reminder that Washington can still choose to help, rather than hinder, America's progress, and I look forward to signing it into law as soon as it reaches my desk," Obama said in a statement Friday.
"After that, Congress should build on this by getting to work on spending bills that invest in America's priorities without getting sidetracked by ideological provisions that have no place in America's budget process," Obama said.
Murkowski was bullish on prospects for moving the appropriations bills. "Through an appropriations process that is now more clearly defined, we have the ability to help direct where funds will be spent and keep downward pressure on spending," she said Friday.
Congress banned earmarks in 2011 and, as a result, lawmakers must find stealthy workarounds to send funding home and focus on policy priorities when it comes to appropriations.
Murkowski, who also heads the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, has focused her efforts on several key issues related to Alaska: increasing funding for fighting wildfires, Indian health and preventing violence in Native communities, and allowing a road through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge for emergency medical situations in King Cove.
Her appropriations bill also includes several provisions strongly opposed by many Democrats -- withholding funding for a controversial Environmental Protection Agency water rule, giving states the chance to opt out of the EPA's Clean Power Plan aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, and eliminating climate change considerations from environmental reviews of federally permitted projects.