Politics: Congress just reached the mother of all budget deals of the Trump era — get ready for a wild 48 hours

The Senate deal would extend government funding in the short term while paving the way for a broader budget deal.

• The House passed a bill Tuesday to fund the US government through March 23, along with a full year of funding for the Pentagon.
• The plan is expected to be dead on arrival in the Senate, where leaders on Wednesday announced a massive, two-year spending deal.
• The Senate deal would extend government funding in the short term while paving the way for a broader budget deal.
• Some House members are wary of the early details of the Senate deal.
• Government funding must be extended by Thursday to avoid a shutdown.

---

Senate leaders on Wednesday announced a massive, bipartisan budget deal that could end Washington's cycle of short-term funding fixes. But it’s unclear how it will be received by both parties' hardline caucuses as leaders work to avoid another shutdown before Friday.

The deal is expected to increase defense and domestic spending by about $300 billion over two years, as well as provide billions of additional dollars in disaster-relief funding.

On the Senate floor, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the agreement "a win for the American people" — one he acknowledged that "neither side loves."

"After months of legislative logjams, this budget deal is a genuine breakthrough," he said.

Less than two days before the federal government is set to once again run out of funding, Congress is scrambling to find a deal to avoid a shutdown. The House on Tuesday voted to advance a bill that would keep the government funded through March 23 while also funding the Department of Defense for the rest of the fiscal year and extending some key Medicare programs.

The bill passed with exclusively Republican votes by a final tally of 245 to 182.

Both Democrats and Republicans favor lifting imposed budget caps. Under the Senate deal, according to The Washington Post, defense spending would get an $80 billion-a-year boost over its current caps, and nondefense would get about $63 billion more a year.

Once Congress lifts the caps, the two parties would then have to agree on the amount individual programs would receive. Such a deal would also need to fund the government until leaders could agree on more specific details.

The big deal is likely to face significant resistance

The deal could get tripped up in Congress by resistance from both parties.

Neither chamber's funding plan addresses immigration — particularly the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals immigration program, which has become a flashpoint in recent congressional funding negotiations because it is set to expire soon. Amid last month's three-day government shutdown, Senate Democrats said they agreed to open the government only because Republicans promised to work in good faith toward a solution.

The lack of any tangible progress toward a DACA deal and its absence from the latest Senate negotiations have left some House Democrats concerned.

"I think, however, unfortunately, it's OK to do it to Dreamers," Rep. Luis Gutierrez told reporters Tuesday, using a nickname for the young unauthorized immigrants whom DACA protects from deportation. "It's OK to turn your back and walk away from Dreamers, and I think that's unfortunate."

Conservative House Republican members have also expressed qualms about the reported Senate deal.

"If the Senate comes back with something that we feel like is best for the American people, then yeah, we're not opposed to it," Rep. Mark Walker, the chair of the Republican Study Committee, told Business Insider. "At the same time, we reserve the right and the authority that if we feel like that they're falling short on something that we promised or what's best for our constituents, then we'll throw a flag on it."

Rep. Jim Jordan, a member of the hard-line conservative Freedom Caucus, was even more blunt.

"This is a bad, bad, bad, bad — you could say 'bad' a hundred times — deal," Jordan said. "When you put it all together, a quarter-trillion-dollar increase in discretionary spending is not what we're supposed to be doing."

The House would have to vote on any legislation that could arise out of the Senate deal.

President Donald Trump suggested that if Congress did not agree to the White House's immigration framework, which focuses on border security, he would "love to see a shutdown."

Joe Perticone contributed to this report.

posted by Campus94