Once the House passes a bill to raise the debt ceiling through 2024, the Senate will have only a couple of days to move it through the chamber ahead of the June 5 deadline.
The Senate needs unanimous consent to speed the measure along, so any one senator has the leverage to bring the country to the brink of default. In an effort to proceed with an expedited vote, Senate leadership will likely need to iron out an agreement of their own to allow several amendment votes from senators who object to certain aspects of the bill, giving them political cover while also allowing the process to move along more quickly.
DEBT LIMIT DEAL: WHERE IT STANDS AND WHAT IS STILL TO COME
Speaking with reporters on Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) would not publicly agree to allowing votes on amendments but made it clear if that would happen, all of them would need to fail.
“We can’t send anything back to the House that would risk default, plain and simple,” Schumer said, responding to a question asking if he will allow votes on amendments.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said he hopes Democrats allow some amendment votes to put the Senate on track to finish the process by the end of the week.
“I can tell you what I hope happens — those who have amendments are given votes to yield back time so we can finish this Thursday or Friday so we can soothe the country and soothe markets,” he said on Wednesday.
Due to procedural rules in the Senate, an individual senator can drag out a bill for about a week. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate, said whether that happens will largely depend on Republicans.
“Whether this passes depends on our Republican colleagues and whether or not they will agree to a time agreement of some kind so that we can get this done,” Stabenow said on Wednesday afternoon. “In theory, if everybody used every action, every objection, this could run out past June. So, this is a very dangerous game that people play.”
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) acknowledged the complexity of allowing votes on the amendments, as there is not enough time for senators to change the bill and send it back to the House.
“I’m hoping none of [the amendments] will be adopted because that’ll send it back to the House,” Blumenthal said to the Washington Examiner. “I think we are pretty well united that we’ll be able to defeat the amendments.”
Several lawmakers are already signaling they are going to need an opportunity to vote on some of their demands in exchange for their support for the bill overall. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is presenting an alternative plan that would impose many more budget cuts and would raise the debt limit for a shorter amount of time.
“I don’t think there are 50 votes. I think about half of the Republican caucus will support mine. No Democrats will support it,” Paul said Wednesday as he got on an elevator. “The American people need to know that’s where we are.”
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and some other defense hawks are pointing to problems they see with the 99-page agreement that would limit overall national security spending in fiscal 2024 to $886 billion, which is roughly a 3% increase from current levels. The South Carolina senator wants to reevaluate the defense spending, a point of frustration for even McConnell.
So far, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) is the only Democrat pushing for an amendment to revoke federal permits for the Mountain Valley Pipeline from the bill. The Virginia senator said he was blindsided by its inclusion in the bill.
“All I’m saying is I deserve an amendment; they put this in the bill without talking to me. I deserve an amendment,” Kaine said on Wednesday. “Sen. Schumer and I talked about it, and I told him I’m going to need an amendment on this.”
Progressives also could pose a risk to passing the debt ceiling bill more quickly, with some pointing to the environmental impact of the new pipeline, the additional work requirements for government benefits, and losing funding for IRS agents. So far, two Democrats have come out against the debt ceiling bill, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR). Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has also raised concerns with the bill but has not directly come out against it.
Some Democrats admit they are still going through the bill and haven’t made a decision yet.
“I’m looking through it, overall I think the framework, yeah, it’s not where we wanted to be, but it’s certainly better than the alternatives,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), a key member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, to the Washington Examiner. “I don’t mean just the alternative of defaults. I mean having some predictability on the budget numbers and the appropriations top lines, I think, will be important for the next few years.”
On the GOP side, Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told the Washington Examiner that he was waiting for the House to pass the bill before making a decision on how he’d vote.
Several Republicans have already decided they’ll vote against the measure, including Paul and Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Josh Hawley (R-MO), Tim Scott (R-SC), Rick Scott (R-FL) and Mike Braun (R-IN).
Some conservatives are signaling they’ll allow the bill to move quickly, as long as they are allowed their amendment votes, specifically deficit hawks like Braun, Lee, and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI). Lee had specifically threatened to utilize “every procedural tool” to hold up a bill that didn’t deliver significant budget cuts.
“There are a lot of things that they could still do to convince me to collapse time,” Lee said to Politico. “If they don’t do those things, then I might do that.”
Asked if the bill’s passage could be held up if Senate leadership declines to bring amendments up for a vote, Braun told the Washington Examiner, “I think so. If we're not going to get an amendment vote, something's gonna stop the process.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), who serves as the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations panel’s defense subcommittee, told reporters Wednesday that she wants a “commitment” from Schumer “to bring each of those appropriations bills to the Senate floor because we can do our work in committee.”
“I’m optimistic that we will do so and report all of those bills,” she continued. “But if Sen. Schumer doesn’t give us floor time, his actions could cause this 1% cut, which is far more harmful to defense than it is to nondefense spending.”