|
Eric Cantor moves to right as John Boehner looks to deal
 Moving to the right of Speaker John Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor distanced himself Tuesday from spending compromises discussed with the White House and took a harder line on whether Republicans should keep the government open absent a budget deal next week. "Time is up here," said the Virginia Republican, telling reporters that a short-term continuing resolution "without a long-term commitment is unacceptable" and that the leadership must push for the full $61 billion in spending cuts approved by the House last month. "That is the House position. That is what we are driving for," Cantor said. When asked specifically about a potential compromise framework that would restore about $26 billion of the House cuts, Cantor said he had no knowledge of those discussions from fellow Republicans. "I have not been told by both sides that," Cantor said. "So that is what I am saying. There is a difference in my knowledge base." "Suffice it to say, I think we ought to be driving as many spending cuts as we possibly can consistent with the desire of our members with a unified position," Cantor said. The leader's comments are important on two fronts. Cantor controls the pacing of legislation on the House floor and will decide when to schedule any future continuing resolution to keep the government operating after the current resolution expires April 8. Second - and more important politically - he risks undercutting efforts by the speaker's office to bridge the House's differences with President Barack Obama while also contending with tea party freshmen resistant to compromise. Indeed, at a news conference just hours after Cantor's comments, Boehner refused to rule out another short-term spending bill and didn't walk away from the fact that in the course of negotiations, smaller cuts have been discussed - albeit without agreement. Asked about a short CR, Boehner said, "I'm not going to put any options on the table or take any options off the table." Regarding the ongoing negotiations, the speaker said: "There are a lot of numbers that have been discussed and thrown around. The fact is there is not an agreement on a number and, secondly, nothing's agreed to until everything's agreed to." As approved Feb. 19, the House-passed package of spending cuts proposed to reduce nonemergency appropriations this year to $1.026 trillion, about $102 billion less than Obama's initial budget requests for 2011 and $61.3 billion below the rate of spending under a CR that expired March 4. In the weeks since, Congress has enacted two more CRs to avert a shutdown, the second of which will expire next Friday. In each case, savings have been included that make up a $10 billion down payment toward what both sides hope will be a final deal soon. But tea party conservatives have grown restless, and when 54 Republicans broke ranks, Boehner had to rely on Democrats to help pass the most recent three-week measure. Cantor was loyal to the speaker in that fight, but as the pressure from tea party activists has increased since - with a rally near the Capitol on Thursday - he has been watched carefully by Democrats who accuse him of making it harder for Boehner to reach a deal with the White House. Cantor has rejected this criticism as partisan, but his answers Tuesday feed into the Democratic narrative, because he would be expected to have more knowledge of the negotiations than he acknowledged. "Republicans need to decide which is worse: angering their tea party base or shutting down the government and threatening our fragile economy even more," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). "The recovery right now is fragile. A shutdown would make it really bad." Boehner's representatives in the White House talks have made no final commitments and insist that any agreement on spending is contingent on an agreement on funding limitations attached to the budget bill. But there's no question - confirmed by Republicans and Democrats alike - that middle-ground numbers have been discussed by both sides. Republicans have suggested a possible top line of $1.052 trillion, and the administration has said it is prepared to move toward $1.058 trillion - leaving a difference of $6 billion. The White House has refused comment on the details of its discussions, but the latest offer follows a discussion between Obama's chief of staff, Bill Daley, and Boehner's office and represents a significant effort to move toward the numbers discussed by the GOP. Measured against the $61 billion in initial House cuts, the new offer - described as now on Reid's desk - would be about halfway. Measured against Obama's budget requests, it would be a reduction of about $70 billion. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) signaled Tuesday that moderate Democrats could step in - as they did weeks ago - and help Boehner if conservatives defect. "My supposition is that we can get pretty close to doing that ... if you got the 180-plus Republicans that he got last time," Hoyer said. "I think the answer to that is probably 'yes.' First of all, we don't want to shut down government; B, we understand that cuts are necessary." But the challenge will almost certainly be harder, because more than 54 House Republicans could very well oppose any final deal, and Democratic moderates are leery of the policy riders and funding limitations that Boehner will need to contain his losses. "It's just not cutting spending; there are a number of limitations that passed the floor of the House," the speaker said Tuesday. "Every appropriations bill that's moved through this House in the 20 years that I've been here has contained limitations. And so will this final package." Reid signaled openness to some compromise. "There aren't many of them that excite me," he said. "But we're willing to look at them." The White House is certain to be more hesitant. "This is a funding bill and a budget bill, and it's not the place for extraneous ideological or political policy to be addressed," White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters traveling with Obama. "We think that the focus should be on funding of the government." | 
