Yesterday, the first day of the 116th Congress,
with both the House and Senate in Washington there were 302 bills introduced.
Of those, seven will probably receive further coverage on this blog:
HR
21 Making appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2019, and
for other purposes. Rep. Lowey, Nita M. [D-NY-17]
HR
43 To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit a report on cyber
vulnerability disclosures, and for other purposes. Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18]
HR
52 To require a report and assessment regarding Department of Homeland
Security responses to terrorist threats to Federal elections, and for other
purposes. Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18]
HR
57 To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a study on the
feasibility of establishing a Civilian Cyber Defense National Resource in the
Department of Homeland Security. Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18]
HR
70 To abolish the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and for
other purposes. Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]
HJ
Res 1 Making further continuing appropriations for the Department of
Homeland Security for fiscal year 2019, and for other purposes. Rep.
Lowey, Nita M. [D-NY-17]
S
21 A bill making continuing appropriations for Coast Guard pay in the event
an appropriations act expires prior to the enactment of a new appropriations
act. Sen. Thune, John [R-SD]
NOTE: All bills introduced in the 115th Congress
are now dead. A bunch of them will be reintroduced in the coming days as the
authors try to get work completed on the bills, but most of them will die a silent
death. There may be some action in the House on bills that were introduced by
Democrats last session, but few of those will be taken up by the Senate if they
are passed in the House.
FY 2019 Spending
The House passed the two of these bills yesterday, HR 21 and
HJ Res 1, that would, if passed by Senate and signed by the President, would
take care of the current funding issue that has about a quarter of the
government either shutdown or working on the hope for funding.
HR 21 would provide funding for Interior, Financial
Services, Agriculture, Transportation, HUD, Commerce, Justice, Science and
State through the end of the fiscal year. Details of that funding are not
currently available as the House passed the bill on a near party-line vote (241-190) without any
text of the bill being available.
HJ Res 1 is a continuing resolution providing for short-term
spending for the Department of Homeland Security. Again, this was passed by a
near party-line vote (239-192)
without any text of the bill being available. So, we do not currently know how
long the extension would be for (sometime in February?) or if the DHS CR will
provide a program extension for the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards
(CFATS) (probably with the same date as the CR).
It looks like the new Democratic House Leadership decided to
split the spending issue into two parts to get most of the funding moving while
leaving the most contentious issues (the ‘wall’ and immigration reform) to be
resolved separately. According to news reports that does not appear to be a
successful move, but we will have to wait and see.
CFATS Program Extension
I was surprised to not see a CFATS bill introduced in either
House. I expected Sen. Johnson (R,WI) to reintroduce S
3405 given the
fuss he made about the bill last November. On the House side I did (do) not
expect to see HR
6992 introduced as it had no support from anyone of consequence in the
House Homeland Security Committee from either party.
Depending on the wording of any CFATS extension in HR 21
(low probability of mention) or HJ Res 1 (probably short term) I would expect
to see a bill similar to HR
7188 that would formally extend the CFATS program for a year to give the
new leadership at Homeland Security and the Energy and Commerce Committees to
craft a longer term extension of the bill. If Democrats continue to form on
CFATS, that would include formal whistleblower protections, worker involvement
language, emergency response planning requirements and possibly some sort of inherently
safer technology language. All of these would cause problems with Johnson and
the Republicans in the Senate. Because of these conflicts I suspect that we
will return to year-by-year extensions until one of the two parties gains controls
of both houses of Congress.
No comments:
Post a Comment