With 30 days left before the government runs out of money again, the House is on recess this week, the Senate leaves next and just trying to make it across the floor before Friday is a $182 billion, multiheaded spending bill resembling Dr. Doolittle's famous Pushmi-Pullyu.

Any hope of Congress avoiding another stopgap spending resolution on Nov. 18 has all but vanished, and it got to the point Wednesday where Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) felt compelled to stand up in the near empty Senate and reassure her unseen C-SPAN audience that more was happening than met the eye.

"People are watching this, saying, 'What are they doing? Just what are they doing,'" Mikulski said in her street-smart Baltimore voice. "Well, we are doing a lot," she insisted, but soon after, Mikulski allowed that she'd feel a whole lot better if more of her colleagues came to the floor.

"This is our opportunity to show that we can govern," Mikulski pleaded. "Let's show that we can govern."

So it goes in Congress these days as lawmakers learn the lost art of doing their job and processing the dozen appropriations bills needed to keep the government operating.

Only half have cleared the House thus far; just one has passed the Senate; and the leadership is now resorting to moving three-in-one legislative packages in hopes of making up for lost time.

"They are moving forward in as close to a regular process as we have had in a while," Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said dryly, but with three bills in one and three sets of floor managers, it can border on bedlam. Five Cabinet departments, not to mention major science agencies, are grouped together in the pending measure this week, for example, and the result is a wildly disjointed debate shifting between school lunch menus to terrorist trials and back to derivative regulations and flood-control projects in the space of 24 hours.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) took heart that he had at least a list in hand of 16 pending amendments late Wednesday, but the bill must be completed this week if the experiment is to have any chance of political success. 

"I am going home," Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye said flatly of his Friday flight to Hawaii. And if the Senate fails to act before leaving, the pressure from the House will only increase to scrap the process and go to a single omnibus measure for the entire government.

It will be Nov. 1 by the time senators get back to work in any case, and even if this first "mini-bus" passes this week, two more will be required to carry all the remaining unfinished bills. Failure to act before the coming recess will only back this up further, and a frustrated Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) proposed the "unthinkable" this week: Just pass a full-year 2012 continuing resolution set at the funding levels agreed in the August budget accords.

"Already this year, we experienced a near shutdown of the federal government in April, a near default on the country's debt in August, a partial shutdown of the Federal Aviation Administration in August and another near shutdown of the federal government three weeks ago because of a dispute over disaster funding," Bingaman told his colleagues in a floor speech Tuesday. "These repeated 'Perils of Pauline' scenarios have understandably shaken the confidence of Americans about their government and more particularly, about this Congress." 

Going into Wednesday night, freshman Sen. Mike Lee, a Utah Republican prominent in tea party circles, was pursuing a motion to recommit or scuttle the pending bill for spending too much. But thus far, surprisingly little of the floor debate has dealt with the appropriations levels that comply with the August budget accords calling for a net reduction from 2011 funding.

Indeed, with the end of earmarks, the typical pork posse, Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, has had to cast a wider net. Millionaire farmers - still getting crop subsidies - and slumlords - still getting payments from the Department of Housing and Urban Development - are two new targets. And McCain found himself ambushed - in almost McCain-like fashion - when he challenged the practice of highway construction funds being diverted to pay for "transportation enhancement" projects such as welcome centers, museums and landscaping.

At issue is a federal formula that requires 10 percent of surface transportation funds to go for such enhancements, something many conservatives oppose because of the drain on gas tax dollars. Trying to be pragmatic, McCain crafted his amendment to leave untouched bicycle paths and environmental improvements for wildlife. But his reward was to be sharply attacked by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) for favoring "bike trails and turtle bridges," while Democrats cast his language in the worst light, suggesting it goes far beyond highways and would impact landmark Amtrak stations and even the Brooklyn Bridge.

"I had no contemplation that civilization would be so affected by such an amendment," McCain answered, taken aback. When asked if she had ambushed McCain - as he has so famously done to others in the past - Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who is one of the bill managers, smiled tightly.

"I just read what he did," Murray said of the amendment. "I know the law is the law. Intent is nice, but people have to interpret the law."

"It wasn't well written, but it's not the only thing that's badly written up there. That's why we revise," Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) said, gesturing toward the second-floor chamber. "It's not a cure-all. It's an amendment. It's a statement."

"I think sometimes around here, we think more in terms of trick than treat," said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.)

Democrats Fret About Stricter Voter ID Laws  

Congressional Democrats are warning that stricter voter identification laws sweeping through state legislatures could suppress voters in the 2012 elections.

At least 34 states have introduced legislation, with varying degrees of restrictiveness, that would require voters to display identification at the polls before they are given a ballot. Some of these laws require voters to produce photo identification; some do not.

The battleground state of Wisconsin has a new law requiring photo IDs, while proposals at various legislative stages in the perennial presidential swing states of Ohio and Pennsylvania are also giving Democrats heartburn. The more restrictive voting ID measure in Ohio is pending Senate floor consideration. A bill to introduce ID rules for the first time in Pennsylvania has passed the state House and is currently in a state Senate committee.

Democratic National Committee spokesman Alec Gerlach said Ohio is "one of the states where this has been a big concern."

A report by the Brennan Center for Justice, a public policy and law institute based at the New York University School of Law, found that more voter ID bills have been introduced this year than in any other year in history.

New voter ID laws have been enacted in Kansas and Rhode Island, and lawmakers in Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee and Texas have moved to tighten laws previously in place, according to data collected by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

"When you have millions potentially unable to vote, it will undoubtedly have political consequences," said Wendy Weiser, a co-author of the Brennan Center report.

Civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) called the laws a "poll tax" on the House floor. Sen. Michael Bennet (D- 

This week, Bennet said he hopes the DOJ will make sure the new laws do not disenfranchise voters or violate civil rights.

"The right to vote is the central foundation of our representative democracy. Some new state laws may impede the exercising of that right by thousands of Americans," he said.

Fifteen Democratic Senators have joined Bennet's effort. Democrats opposing voter ID laws say they unfairly target minorities, college students and the elderly - voters who are less likely to have a government-issued ID and people who, incidentally, traditionally vote for Democrats.

One estimate suggests that as many as 5 million voters could be affected by the rule changes in 2012 - a number greater than the margin of victory in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections.

Democrats are reluctant to openly acknowledge the political consequences of these laws in future elections, saying the issue for them is about infringements on voter's rights. But they do argue that the laws hurt Democratic voters more than Republicans.

Republicans counter that voter identification laws are essential to prevent voter fraud.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said he is supporting voter ID legislation to make sure "elections are run fairly and securely."

One sliver of good news for Democrats is that so far this year, voter ID bills have had little success in most of the states that President Barack Obama won in 2008 that will again be competitive in 2012.

Bills in Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Iowa and North Carolina have stalled, failed or were vetoed by the governor. Colorado, Florida, Virginia and Michigan already had voter ID laws in place and have seen no further tightening of the rules this year.

Weiser said the lack of success this year for voter ID bills in battleground states has more to do with split party control than the states' statuses during national elections. The parties share power in Virginia, Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Nevada and New Mexico. Still, she said, "The battleground states are the ones where the fights are the fiercest."

The DNC's Gerlach said winning small battles in these states is little conciliation when it comes to protecting voters.

"Even if it happens in a couple states, regardless of what states they are, it is not good," he said.