This week: Shutdown deadline looms over Congress

So much for that early getaway.

Instead, Congress now has just four days to avert a government shutdown on Saturday. 

It’s not in the interest of either party to let a shutdown happen a month before Election Day. But rather than reaching a compromise and returning to the campaign trail earlier than scheduled, lawmakers are finding themselves ever closer to the funding deadline without a clear path forward.

{mosads}The Senate will take its first procedural vote on the short-term spending bill Tuesday. Republicans, trying to pressure Democrats into supporting the legislation, argue they will be responsible for shutting down the government if the measure fails to pass.

Democrats balked over the legislation, noting they did not sign off on the proposal from Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). 

“Senator McConnell repaid our good faith by trying to jam us with a bill we haven’t seen and blocking amendment votes,” said Adam Jentleson, a spokesman for Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). 

Democrats are demanding that funds to help the city of Flint, Mich., deal with its tainted drinking water be included in the 10-week spending bill. They argue it’s unfair for the stopgap measure to set aside funds to help flood victims in Louisiana, West Virginia and Maryland, but not Flint. 

“One hundred thousand people in Flint, Mich., are still waiting for their water to be clean and safe,” Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) said on the Senate floor. “Nine thousand children have already had lead exposure that can cause permanent and irreversible damage. It tells Michigan to keep waiting in line.”

In a letter to Republican leaders, members of the Congressional Black Caucus called it a “moral imperative” to include Flint aid in the spending bill.

McConnell will need at least six Democratic senators to buck leadership and back the legislation, which would fund the government through Dec. 9. 

At least one Democratic senator appears willing to support the spending bill, known as a continuing resolution. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), announcing his support late last week, said, “While I support the people of Flint, my priority is the people of Florida.” 

The spending measure includes $1.1 billion to fight the Zika virus, as well as money to fund the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act (CARA), aimed at combating opioid and prescription drug abuse. 

GOP leadership also dropped a push by Sen. Ted Cruz to block the administration from transferring management of the internet to an international body. The Texas Republican’s push had earned fierce pushback from Democrats and the White House. 

An alternative pathway for the Flint aid could be a water resources infrastructure bill.

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said last week that the Flint aid should be dealt with as part of a water resources infrastructure bill slated for House consideration this week. 

The Senate version of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) approved earlier this month includes $220 million to address water infrastructure improvements in Flint. But the House measure does not have Flint aid provisions, meaning the two chambers would have to resolve the issue in conference committee negotiations. 

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), the ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, pointed to the lack of Flint funding, arguing the House should take up the Senate bill. 

“Republicans need to either take up and pass the Senate WRDA bill now – or include assistance for the families of Flint in the CR,” she said in a statement. “We have to help people who are in dire need in this country – and not pick and choose which American families we’re going to help.”

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), the committee chairman, appeared to try to assuage concerns on Friday that aid money would get left out of the final WRDA bill. 

“WRDA 2016 not only provides the critical support Flint needs now but it also will help to prevent future water and wastewater infrastructure crises across the nation,” he wrote in a Huffington Post op-ed. “WRDA 2016 is the right vehicle, and I am committed to getting this bill to the president’s desk.”

Hammering out a bicameral compromise over the WRDA likely wouldn’t be resolved until the lame-duck session of Congress. However, that might not be enough for lawmakers who want Flint to receive federal aid sooner rather than later.

Obama’s first veto override?

Congress appears to have the votes to override a veto from President Obama for the first time in his two terms in the White House.

Many Democrats are steadfastly supporting legislation opposed by Obama that would empower families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia over alleged ties to the terrorists who carried them out.

The families have sought damages from Saudi Arabia given that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from that country. 

The Senate will move first on the veto override, though exact timing remains uncertain as lawmakers drag out the spending fight. 

David Popp, a spokesman for McConnell, said Friday that “the Senate will consider it as soon as practicable in this work period.”

Senate leadership, and supporters of the bill, quickly voiced confidence after the president’s veto that they had the 67 votes necessary to pass the legislation for a second time. 

“This is a disappointing decision that will be swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress,” Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), expected to be the next Senate Democratic leader, said in a statement Friday. “I believe both parties will come together next week to make JASTA the law of the land.” 

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who spearheaded the bill with Schumer, said a veto override will “send a clear message that we will not tolerate those who finance terrorism in the United States.” 

Under current U.S. law, victims may sue a country designated as a state sponsor of terrorism, such as Iran. The bill would allow citizens to sue countries without that designation, including Saudi Arabia. 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said that she’d vote to override the veto, a move that’ll give other House Democrats cover to defy the president.

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton also said she would sign the bill if she were in the White House.

That’s left President Obama a minority in his party in arguing the bill would undermine diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia and encourage other countries to pass similar laws that would make U.S. diplomats and military service members vulnerable to litigation.

Some Democrats will oppose the legislation, but indications are that both the House and Senate have two-thirds majorities to override the veto.

A handful of senators — including Sens. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), ranking member of the Intelligence Committee — have voiced concerns about the bill. 

Those arguments, however, have failed to gain traction in a body that passed the legislation unanimously earlier this year. Corker, who pushed for changes to the bill, told The Hill, “I can’t feel a lot of energy coming from the White House on this issue.”