Iowa’s five U.S. House representatives split on party lines when the House approved a 2012 budget for the Homeland Security department on June 2. Republicans Tom Latham (IA-04) and Steve King (IA-05) voted with most of their caucus for the bill, which significantly reduces Homeland Security appropriations from current levels. Democrats Bruce Braley (IA-01), Dave Loebsack (IA-02), and Leonard Boswell (IA-03) voted against the bill, as did all but 17 House Democrats.
Follow me after the jump for more about how the Iowans voted on notable Homeland Security budget amendments. I also discuss various amendments King tried to add to this bill.
Last week’s budget debate was extraordinary in that Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King of New York was one of the 17 House Republicans to vote against this bill. He denounced his colleagues’ work in harsh terms:
“I believe it is putting us at risk,” said the New York Republican, refusing to support his party’s $40.6 billion Homeland Security budget brought to the House floor by the Appropriations Committee leadership.
“It’s important that cities and governments have some sense of continuity of where the funding will come from, and as we approach the 10th anniversary of September 11th do we really want to cut our police departments, our counter-terrorism units, our intelligence units?”
“To me, this is an invitation to an attack,” King said on the floor. “We cannot put ourselves in that position.”
I can’t think of a precedent for a Congressional committee chair so strongly opposing his own party’s spending plans. King’s concerns weren’t enough to scuttle this bill, but the first amendment considered when the Homeland Security budget hit the floor on June 1 restored about $320 million in local firefighter grants. It passed easily with yes votes from all the Democrats present and 147 Republicans. Guess which Iowa Republican expects a tough re-election campaign next year: Tom Latham voted to restore the firefighter grant funding, while Steve King was one of the 87 Republicans to vote against that amendment.
The next amendment considered would have restored $337 million for security measures in urban areas considered most at risk of terrorist attack. The amendment failed on a 154 to 266 vote. Braley was the only Iowan to vote yes. I have to wonder why Loebsack, Boswell, Latham and King went along with funding cuts that could leave major American population centers more vulnerable. I get that this pot of money doesn’t go to any Iowa cities, but presumably our state’s representatives would be outraged if their colleagues from larger metro areas voted against funding to prevent the tragedies most likely to strike Iowans.
Also on June 1, the House approved by voice vote a number of amendments providing for small funding increases to this or that area of the Homeland Security budget. Steve King sponsored two of those amendments: one called for an extra $1 million for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the other called for an extra $1 million for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. According to a statement from King’s office, the border protection funding will pay for “the eradication of lookout points that have been established along the U.S.-Mexico border by drug smugglers.” The immigration funding will pay for hiring and training more officers to serve in the “Shadow Wolves” program, a Native American tracking unit based in southern Arizona.
King sponsored two other amendments that were ruled out of order on June 1. The first called for $50 million for a fence on the U.S. border with Mexico. That was thrown out on the grounds that “the amendment allocated money for a program not authorized.”
King’s other unsuccessful amendment would have prohibited the use of funds to implement the 2010 health insurance reform bill. That was ruled out of order on the grounds that it included tax measures.
King’s final amendment to the Homeland Security budget did get a recorded vote on June 2. It prohibited the use of funds “for various ACORN and Community Organizations.” Don’t ask me why Congress needs to bar Homeland Security funds from going to a defunct organization, but the House approved that amendment on a 251 to 168 vote. Latham voted with King and most other Republicans to stick it to ACORN one more time. Braley, Loebsack and Boswell all voted against that gesture.
Privacy advocates may be interested in two failed amendments proposed by Republican Justin Amash of Michigan. One would have barred “the use of funds to purchase new advanced imaging technology machines,” and the other would have barred “the use of funds to operate or maintain existing advanced imaging technology machines as mandatory or primary screening devices.” On June 2 all five Iowans voted against both of those amendments, which failed on lopsided votes of 127 to 295 and 123 to 300. We can infer that King, Latham, Braley, Loebsack, and Boswell aren’t worried about the privacy or health implications of the “backscatter” machines now used at many U.S. airports.
Two other amendments caught my eye, both related to labor relations within the Transportation Security Administration. Representative Todd Rokita of Indiana sponsored a measure to “prohibit the use of funds to implement the determination of the Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration regarding transporation security officers and collective bargaining.” I wasn’t aware of that February 2011 decision, which endorsed collective bargaining for TSA employees “at the national-level only.” The House approved Rokita’s amendment by a narrow 218 to 205 vote. Republican John Mica’s amendment sought to undermine collective bargaining efforts by specifying the exact amount of money the TSA may spend during the 2012 fiscal year on “screener personnel, compensation, and benefits.” That amendment passed 219 to 204. The Iowans split on predictable party lines: Republicans for both anti-union measures, Democrats against them.
As I mentioned above, King and Latham voted for final passage of the Homeland Security budget on June 2. Latham didn’t issue a press release on this vote, but King’s office sent this out:
Washington D.C.- Congressman Steve King (R-IA) released the following statement after the House of Representatives approved three amendments he introduced to H.R. 2017, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2012. The first of King’s amendments dedicates funding to U.S. Customs and Border Protection for the eradication of lookout points that have been established along the U.S.-Mexico border by drug smugglers. The second allocates funds for the hiring and training of additional officers to serve in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s “Shadow Wolves” program. The third King amendment prohibits any federal funding appropriated by the DHS bill from being distributed to the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) and its more than 300 affiliates.
H.R. 2017 passed the House of Representatives today on a vote of 231-188.
Iowans in the new third and fourth Congressional districts may hear about the Homeland Security budget vote during next year’s campaigns, because as David Rogers reported for Politico, the spending cuts are deep:
The spending total reflects a cut of more than $1 billion from 2011 appropriations, already reduced in April from the prior 2010 levels. Within the new limits, state and local first-responder grants must compete with the pressure to increase FEMA disaster aid funding, especially after the spate of recent storms in the South and Midwest. And the result has been a proposed two-third, $2 billion reduction from the state and local aid funded just a year ago.
It’s not the last word on funding these programs during the next fiscal year, because the Senate may restore some of the money cut by the House. Also, more than half the House Republicans, including Latham and King, voted against an amendment that would have made even deeper spending cuts in the department’s budget. Still, it’s interesting that Homeland Security wasn’t able to escape the GOP’s austerity axe the way the Pentagon did when the House recently passed the Defense Authorization bill.
Share any comments about the 2012 federal budget in this thread.