Inside D.C.

Everyone wants a ticket to ride the omnibus

When the end of session looms and lobbyists are desperate to get a piece of legislation over the finish line, we look for “any train leaving the station,” meaning what must-pass legislation is going to get floor action and can I get my language in that bill?  The ultimate “last train” this session is the pending FY2016 omnibus spending bill.   Everybody’s thinking either their issue is no innocuous or the goal of funding the government so primary, as their little issue won’t be noticed.

The session is set to recess December 18 or thereabouts, and the scramble for seats on the omnibus train is in high gear.

Crafting the omnibus package has been just a little controversial for our elected officials.  A five-day continuing resolution (CR) to keep the federal machine cranking until December 16, was cleared for the President’s signature the morning of December 11.  Mr. Obama says he’ll sign the CR “only to give Congress enough time to pass a budget, but the GOP must drop ideological riders and compromise.”  Such a pointless statement as just about every lobbyist in town is pushing for his/her “ideological” rider to be on that train.

Spending isn’t holding up the omnibus – the October budget deal pumped another $80 billion into the discretionary spending pool – and deals on the 12 individual spending bills are cut and dried.  The problem is riders; there are 40-plus policy riders in play, ranging from limits on and certification of Syrian and Iraqi refugees, to patent protection for ryegrass.

Ag interests are major players in the policy rider game.  National Farmers Union (NFU) is the only ag group I can find calling on lawmakers to pass a clean CR – no policy riders – as NFU deems most ag policy issues in the mix as sufficiently important to be dealt with as stand-alone legislation.  Another pointless statement given how Washington works.

Here are some of the “asks” from the aggies, and my predictions as to whether they’ll get a seat on the omnibus train:

A monster priority for agriculture is forcing EPA to withdraw the WOTUS rule, and this move is sufficiently controversial it’s risen to negotiation among chamber leaders. This rider has a chance, since similar language to kill EPA carbon recapture and ozone rules is even more objectionable to Democrats, and in any event, WOTUS has been halted indefinitely by federal court order.  Democrats see giving up WOTUS as bargaining leverage on other issues.

An insider says the next 72 hours will tell whether language preempting state laws requiring the labeling of foods containing genetically engineered (GE) ingredients makes the cut. The broad ag/food industry coalition is pushing a simple two-year federal preemption, punting the broader labeling issue into 2016.  Food companies finally figured out they need preemption by year’s end given Vermont’s GE labeling law goes into effect in July, 2016, if it survives a federal court challenge by four separate industry groups.  I think this one makes it.

With the World Trade Organization (WTO) having approved more than $1 billion in retaliatory tariffs to be levied by Canada and Mexico over U.S. COOL rules, there’s a major Senate effort to get language into the omnibus repealing COOL – as the House has already done.  Given Sen. Pat Roberts (R, KS) is pushing this option, this one gets a seat on the train.

Language in the House version of the omnibus resurrects long-dead commodity certificates, a move strongly and loudly opposed by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R, IA).  Grassley says reinstating the certificate program is giving farmers license to skirt payment limits on federal income support programs included in the 2014 Farm Bill.  A senior Senate staffer said commodity groups can’t oppose cuts in crop insurance and reopening the 2014 Farm Bill, then turn around and urge appropriators to reopen the farm law to reinstate certificates.  Certificates don’t get to ride.

Dodd-Frank regulations are under attack as Republicans try to exert greater congressional oversight of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and exempt small banks from Dodd-Frank regulations.  There’s also an attempt to overturn the Labor Department’s fiduciary rule on retirement and investment advisors.  Democrats say a loud “no” to this GOP move.  House financial services lawmakers say most Dodd-Frank language won’t make the omnibus cut.

Here’s a perennial favorite – a push by some in the House to impose limits on who can participate in the federal sugar support program.  In a “dear colleague” letter, Reps. Joe Pitts (R, PA) and Bob Goodlatte (R, VA) told other lawmakers they just want to ensure the sugar program has the same eligibility rules as other federal programs.  The lawmakers called the language a “simple extension of existing farm program rules.” This language will die a quiet death.