GOP moves quickly to install new spending chief

House Republicans are expected to move quickly this week to install a new head of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, as the party seeks to get off to a strong start on crafting plans on how to fund the government next year.

The House Republican Steering Committee is expected to consider a new chair for the panel after the lower chamber returns from recess on Tuesday, just weeks after Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) said she would step down as chair.

Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), head of the subcommittee that crafts funding for transportation and housing programs, is seen as an early favorite for the coveted seat and is already weighing some of the changes he hopes to see if elected in the next days. That includes getting Congress to finish its annual funding work on time this year.

“No. It’s one thing to do the work and put leadership in a position to make the decisions they want to make,” Cole said in an interview Monday.

But he also acknowledged that given the current pace of appropriations work in both chambers — and as Washington prepares for the next election cycle — Congress is again on track for some kind of stopgap in September, when funding government is about to expire.

“What normally happens in an election year is that the winners essentially decide whether we want to finish our business by the end of the calendar, or do we think we have some political advantage by waiting later, and do we want to push them to the beginning of next year? Cole said.

“I never liked it. It doesn’t matter if we win or lose. I’ve been on both sides of this before, and I will say that I think it’s almost always a mistake to push them into next year because it really puts the next Congress behind the eight ball,” he said.

Cole added that the change in administration “doesn’t make much of a difference in the wording” of the 12th annual appropriations bill, noting that the final product “will end up being somewhat bipartisan because you have to get to 60 in the Senate.”

His comments came weeks after Congress finally rejected its annual appropriations work for fiscal year 2024 in March, about six months after the initial deadline, following a nasty months-long spending fight.

The legislation’s passage capped months of tense bipartisan negotiations over spending in the divided Congress, as well as intraparty fights in the House, where hard-line conservatives came out strongly against it.

Before Congress went on recess last month, the House Appropriations Committee held several hearings to prepare for fiscal year 2025, as many Republicans are eager for another attempt to further restrict government funding and ensure conservative political changes.

In his letter announcing his decision to resign as president, Granger referred to the upcoming November elections and the impact they would have on this year’s budget fight.

“Recognizing that an election year often results in final appropriations bills that will not be enacted until the next fiscal year, it is important that I do everything in my power to ensure a seamless transition before bill development for the FY25 begins in earnest,” Granger wrote. .

The Steering Committee is expected to vote on Granger’s replacement Tuesday afternoon, sending its recommendation to the House GOP conference soon after. Cole is running unopposed for the seat and has already won support from a portion of the Republican Party’s other big-spending cardinals and some conservatives.

The Steering Committee is made up of more than two dozen legislators, including leaders, committee and subcommittee chairs, and other representatives. The body determines most of the committee’s duties.

Cole, who noted that he has served on the committee several times since 2006, has “good friends” on the panel and is confident that his candidacy is in “good shape.”

In other words, Cole is confident in his chances this week. But that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been some resistance to the idea of ​​quick elections without certain changes.

A big-spending cardinal, Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees funding for the Health, Human Services and Labor departments, called on the Republican Party to postpone a quick election for the panel’s next leader.

At the time, Aderholt called on Republicans to agree on a broader spending strategy before selecting a new president.

“Rather than hastily selecting a new Appropriations Chairman, I believe now is the time to focus on fixing the process and developing our governing theory for how we will manage our responsibilities,” he wrote in a letter to his colleagues this week last.

Aderholt, the longest-serving Republican on the House Appropriations Committee who has not served as chairman, also reiterated the need for reforms in a follow-up article published Tuesday in Roll Call.

“The election of an Appropriations Committee Chair is an opportunity to take stock of how it is working and how it is not. While I thank President Granger and Vice President Cole for their leadership in helping us navigate these challenging times, ultimately we are at a decision point,” he wrote. “We need to begin our work for FY25 now, but doing so without changes almost guarantees a lame-duck December session driven by Democrats’ spending decisions.”

Aderholt was one of more than 100 Republicans who voted against a sweeping $1.2 trillion funding package from the federal government last month due to his opposition to funding earmarked for projects on abortion and immigration issues.

Their opposition came at a time when Conservatives in both chambers strongly denounced the use of earmarks, which allow members to secure funding for community projects in their home country, in the package, as well as the overall price and scope of the package. financing.

“In my years of service on the Committee, I have never voted against my own bill while Republicans held the majority – until this year,” Aderholt wrote Tuesday.

“This may seem trivial to some, but here’s why it should be important to everyone: If the leader of one of Congress’s largest subcommittees can’t distinguish the bill he’s voting on from the one passed by his subcommittee, what hope is there for his colleagues? ? , much less the American public?”