The budget conference between House and Senate is in disarray, with House Republicans
worried that Obamacare repeal is going to be given short shrift, but that's not the only problem. Usually, it's the House rabble that causes all the disruption, but the latest wrinkle is coming from the Senate side, where Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) is not happy with the
big $40 billion defense spending boost the House passed in their version. Of course the House didn't come up with any tax increases to pay for that spending boost, and deficit peacock Corker
does not approve. At least, that appears to be why he's refusing to sign off on a budget deal.
The Tennessee Republican said on Tuesday it was because of "policy issues on the budget" but would not elaborate. His refusal to sign on to the deal stops the agreement for the time being. Budget negotiators had wanted to announce the deal Monday night. […]
The agreement that has yet to be released publicly is said to use a war fund account to circumvent budget caps and give the Pentagon a $38 billion raise.
Corker has told POLITICO previously that the ploy is a budget "gimmick."
"To me the [overseas contingency account] piece, I hate to be too pejorative, it's really a slush fund."
That's part of a larger fight Corker has been having with leadership and another "gimmick" that appropriators use to shift funding around. Corker and Idaho Republican Mike Crapo tried to pass a budget amendment that would not allow for "changes in mandatory spending," the practice of delaying mandatory spending for a few years to claim savings that are then spent on whatever appropriators want to spend it on which in the case of Republicans is always defense. Yes, it's a gimmick and yes it's just delaying spending that's going to have to happen eventually because it is mandatory. Corker hates it, but instead of arguing for actual tax increases to provide some revenue to pay for stuff, he's just refusing to sign off on this budget blueprint.