Review - S 2625 Introduced – FY 2024 DHS Spending

Back in July, Sen Murphy (D,CT) introduced S 2625, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2024. The Senate Appropriations Committee published their Report on the bill. Beyond the funding for CISA there is no mention of cybersecurity in the bill, but there are a multitude of discussions of cybersecurity in the Report. Interestingly, the bill fully funds the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) program, though it is only explained in the Report.

The House passed their version of the bill (HR 4367) on September 27^th, 2023 on a near party-line vote.

Moving Forward

Typically, the Senate takes up the House version of spending bills and then substitutes language from the Senate version of the bill as the first amendment considered. That is not going to happen this year with the DHS spending bill as the House (in §15 of H Res 723) prohibited the Clerk from notifying the Senate that HR 4367 had passed in the House until HR 2 (the House Republican signature border security bill) was enacted into law. Since the Democratic controlled Senate is not going to take up HR 2 and President Biden would not sign it if it were passed, the Senate will not be able to take action on HR 4367.

The easy way forward for the Senate would be to include the language from this bill along with their language for another spending bill (probably the DOD spending bill) when it considers that legislation. In any case, if the Senate does take up that bill (an open question if the confusion in the House continues for too long, imperiling the passage of spending bills by November 17^th), it will ultimately pass a version significantly different that the language in House version. A conference committee will then be formed to negotiate a version that could theoretically pass in both houses. We still have to see if there is language, this year, that could pass in both the House and Senate.

 

For more information on the provisions of this bill, including details on cybersecurity and CFATS spending – see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/s-2625-introduced - subscription required.

House Completed Consideration of Spending Bills – 9-27-23

Yesterday, the House continued their consideration of amendments for the three spending bill that they began consideration of on Tuesday, including HR 4365 (DOD spending), HR 4367 (DHS spending) HR 4368 (ARD spending) HR 4665 (State Dept spending), and HR 5692 (Ukraine supplemental). The House considered 60 amendments and passed 26. None of the amendments were of specific interest here.

Final Action

The House completed action on all five spending bills:

HR 4368 (ARD) Failed by a vote of 191 to 237 (27 Republicans voted Nay),

HR 4367 (DHS) Passed by a vote of 220 to 208 (2 Democrats vote Yea),

HR 5692 (Ukraine) Passed by a vote of 311 to 117 (117 Republicans voted Nay),

HR 4365 (DOD) Passed by a vote of 218 to 210 (2 Republicans voted Nay, 2 Democrats vote Yea)

HR 4665 (State) Passed by a vote of 216 to 212 (2 Republicans vote Nay)

Moving Forward

Three of the bills (HR 5692, HR 4365, and HR 4665) will now be forwarded to the Senate for action. The DHS bill will not be forwarded to the Senate until HR 2 (the House Republican signature border security bill) is enacted (this was included in §15 of H Res 723 that passed in the House on Tuesday). It is not yet clear what if any action will be taken in the Senate. If the provisions of the Senate CR included in the Senate version of HR 3539 (which I have not seen yet) are enacted, we will almost certainly see an Omnibus spending bill sometime after the first of the year. In that case no action will be taken on these bills. If HR 5525 (the House version of a short term CR being considered today) is enacted, the Senate would probably take up the DOD and DHS spending bills (perhaps as its own minibus), substitute Senate language and pass those bills. But the Senate would probably first resume consideration of HR 4366, their first minibus that includes the ARD spending. HR 5692 will likely be taken up in the Senate in either case and will probably pass without change.

Commentary

Of course, this discussion presupposes that the House will pass a continuing resolution. At this point, I do not think that that is possible. While the House was able to pass four of the five spending bill, it was only at the cost of including language that would have no chance of being considered in the Senate, of surviving a conference committee, or being signed by the President. The language of HR 5525 fits in the same mold. Unfortunately for the House leadership, there are probably enough of the Republican 11 that see any CR as an anathema that I will be surprised to see the House approve the rule for the consideration of HR 5525, much less pass the bill.

At this point, I do not see anyway that any CR makes it to President Biden’s desk before midnight Saturday, the government (well vast swaths of it anyway) will shutdown on Sunday. IF HR 5525 passes, it will be some relatively lengthy period before serious negotiations are able to proceed on a bill that would reopen the government as the Republican 11 will volubly insist on maintaining all of the provisions of HR 5525 in any deal, a non-starter as a negotiating position. If HR 5525 fails (and I expect that it will) and the Senate passes HR 3539 (FAA reauthorization) with CR provisions, Speaker McCarthy will be faced with deciding to make a deal with Democrats and facing an inevitable floor fight for retaining his speakership. In either case, McCarthy is going to have to make a deal with Democrats and face the ire of the Republican 11. Now it is just waiting to see how long it will take him to realize that.

21 Amendments Considered for HR 4368 – FY 2024 ARD Spending Bill – 9-27-23

Yesterday (ending at about 0300 EDT today) the House started considering HR 4368, the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024 (ARD Spending) under provisions of H Res 723. There were 21 amendments addressed (actually the 1^st amendment was an en bloc amendment with  40 amendments listed in H Rept 118-226, the Rules Committee Report for H Res 712) adopted by a mix of voice votes and recorded votes. None of the amendments were of any specific interest here.

A significant number of the amendments were reductions in spending for various agencies and programs. These were from base numbers that were already lower than the spending agreement made earlier this year between the President and the Speaker. While many of the amendments reduced spending by a specific amount or per cent, the majority of the reductions were to levels in specific earlier fiscal years. Nine of those amendments failed by recorded vote:

H.Amdt.306 - Failed by recorded vote: 175 – 254,

H.Amdt.307 - Failed by recorded vote: 119 – 307,

H.Amdt.308 - Failed by recorded vote: 106 – 323,

H.Amdt.310 - Failed by recorded vote: 86 – 343.

H.Amdt.311 - Failed by recorded vote: 89 - 341

H.Amdt.312 - Failed by recorded vote: 68 – 362,

H.Amdt.315 - Failed by recorded vote: 83 – 348,

H.Amdt.317 - Failed by recorded vote: 81 – 350, and

H.Amdt.318 - Failed by recorded vote: 105 – 325,

Today’s Consideration

The House returned to the chambers at 9:00 this morning and instead of continuing with the ARD spending bill, they took up HR 4365, the DOD spending bill. At about 3:00 pm it stopped considering the DOD bill (without completing their work) and started on HR 4367, the DHS spending bill. At about 4:30 pm, they stopped consideration of that bill (again without completing their work) and resumed working on the ARD bill. At about 5:50 pm they finished work on the amendments to the ARD bill, but did not vote on the bill, instead resuming consideration of the amendments for the DOD bill. At 6:30 pm the House completed consideration of those amendments, but did not vote on the bill, instead they resumed working on amendments for the DHS bill. That is what they are working on as I write this post.

Interestingly, HR 4665, the State Department spending bill, which was included in H Res 723, has not been considered by the House as of yet.

I will have more details on today’s considerations after the Congressional Record is printed sometime tomorrow afternoon.

Commentary

This is an unusual way to consider legislation, but at this point, it is hardly surprising that the Republican lead is working an unusual process. It looks like McCarthy is trying to get all of the detail work of the legislative process complete before they start the final vote process. I wonder if he has concerns about the results of the votes, like perhaps a couple of the Republican 11 voting against one of more of the bills because not enough spending cuts were made.

Review - House to Try Spending Bills Yet Again – DOD, DHS, State, and ARD -

Well, as I mentioned yesterday, it was rinse and repeat on the floor of the House today. The House convened at 10:00 am EDT and then recessed at 10:33 subject to the call of the chair (after minor housekeeping). The House then reconvened at 1:47 pm EDT, agreed to meet next on Tuesday at 2:00 pm (Yom Kippur effectively blocks meetings on Sunday and Monday). Again, the whole charade was to allow the House Rules Committee to meet to formulate a rule that could be considered on Tuesday.

Rule for Considering Spending Bills

The Rules Committee did also reconvene, and it did formulate a single rule by which the following FY 2024 spending bills will be considered starting Tuesday:

HR 4365, DOD,

HR 4367, DHS,

HR 4665, State, and

HR 4368, ARD

Moving Forward

Sometime on Tuesday morning, the House will probably begin the debate on the rule for the consideration of these four spending bills. Twice this summer similar rules were pulled before the debate could begin because the Republican leadership counted heads and determined that they would not pass. Earlier this month, the leadership ignored their head counting and allowed similar rules to be debated and votes to proceed; they lost both votes because of defections of five or six Republicans. I have yet to see anything that would indicate that there was a significant chance that the leadership would now be able to convince essentially all Republicans to vote for this rule.

 

For more details about the provisions of the rule adopted today, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/house-to-try-spending-bills-yet-again - subscription required.

House to Try Spending Bills Again?

After recessing yesterday morning ‘subject to the call of the Chair’, the House reconvened at 10:00 pm last night to adjourn. Added at the last minute, however, was a notice that: “The next meeting is scheduled for 9:00 a.m. on September 22, 2023.” The House was originally scheduled to be in a ‘District Work Day’, and many members had departed Washington.

Shortly before the House adjourned last night it was announced that the House Rules Committee would meet today at 1:00 pm “to begin consideration of the following emergency measures [emphasis added]”:

• HR 4367 – Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Bill, 2024

• HR 4665 – Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2024

• HR 4365 – Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2024 [Rule Markup Only]

• HR 4368 - Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024 [Rule Markup Only]

The annotation ‘Rule Markup Only’ means that the Committee is not planning on considering changing the amendments that it had already approved for consideration on the floor of the House. The Rules Committee had previously called for the submission of amendments for HR 4367 and HR 4665, so the Committee Staff will have something to work with in preparing the rule for the consideration of those two bills.

There is nothing currently (06:56 EDT) on the Majority Leader’s Schedule for today, but it looks like the Speaker has decided to try yet again to pass spending bills. There is a good chance that since these are being considered as ‘emergency measures’ that the House will work through the weekend, if, of course, a rule can be approved on the floor. There is a chance that the leadership is hoping that a sufficient number of no votes (mostly Democrats) will not make it back to Washington in time for a vote on the Rule to counteract the defecting Republican votes. If that succeeds, I suspect that there would be a motion to vacate submitted quite quickly.

Review - HR 4367 Introduced – FY 2024 DHS Spending

Earlier this week, Rep Joyce (R,OH) introduced HR 4367, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2024. The House Appropriations Committee also published their Report on the bill. The bill includes a relatively modest ($19 million) increase in spending for the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). While chemical security is not mentioned in the bill, there are a number of chemical security, cybersecurity, cyber workforce, and counter-UAS provisions outlined in the Committee Report.

Chemical Security

There are no discussions about chemical security issues in the bill or the report. There is a single line entry in the funding tables on page 170 of the report under Infrastructure Security. It shows that the Committee is funding ‘Chemical Security’ (including the CFATS program) at $37.949 million for FY 2024. That is $3.26 million less that FY 2023 and $3.3 million less than the President requested. The Appropriations Committee clearly expects the CFATS program to continue through FY 2024.

CISA Spending

Starting on page 41, the bill outlines the FY 2024 spending for CISA. The bill would provide $2.37 billion for the Agency. According to the Report (pg 4) this is $19.2 above the FY 2023 spending. The Committee noted that:

“Recognizing that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) budget has grown 44 percent over the last three fiscal years, the bill provides $2,926,291,000 to sustain investments in securing federal civilian cyber networks and helping state and local governments and the private sector secure both cyber and physical infrastructure. The amount is $19,153,000 above the fiscal year 2023 enacted level. This strategic pause in significant budget growth provides CISA the opportunity to mature its operations commensurate with the enacted level.”

Moving Forward

This, as with all spending bills, is a bill that has not been passed in the House for some time. In recent years disagreements over immigration and border issues have even stopped the Committee from attempting to publish/report a DHS spending bill. The Republican leadership has included their solutions this year over the opposition of the minority. The Minority Views section (pg 190) of the report outlines their problems with those solutions. What this means for the bill is that it may pass in the House, but it will be strictly on a party-line vote. That is, of course, if the Republican 11 are satisfied in the level of spending cuts included in the bill.

There is little in this bill that will pass mustard with the Democrats in the Senate. Their version of the bill will look a lot different. When the Senate takes up HR 4367 (if, a really big ‘if’, the House actually passes it) they will substitute language from the version being developed by the Senate Appropriations Committee. That version (much amended to appease at least 10 Republicans) may pass on a slightly bipartisan basis. Then a conference committee will work out the differences and maybe McCarthy will work a deal with Democrats to pass the bill in opposition to the right wing of his Party.

There are way too many ‘if’s’, ‘maybe’s’, and ‘may’s’ and other qualifiers in that description. I will not be surprised if this bill never makes it to the President’s desk.

 

For more details about the provisions of the bill, including funding changes and policy discussions, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/hr-4367-introduced - subscription required.

Bills Introduced – 6-27-23

Yesterday, with the House meeting in proforma session, there were 37 bills introduced. Six of those bills may receive additional coverage in this blog:

HR 4364 Making appropriations for the Legislative Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes. Amodei, Mark E. [Rep.-R-NV-2]

HR 4365 Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2024 Calvert, Ken [Rep.-R-CA-41]

HR 4366 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2024 Carter, John R. [Rep.-R-TX-31]

HR 4367 Making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes. Joyce, David P. [Rep.-R-OH-14]

HR 4368 Making appropriations for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2024, and for other purposes. Harris, Andy [Rep.-R-MD-1] 

HR 4387 To amend the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a program providing for the establishment of Agriculture Cybersecurity Centers, and for other purposes. Nunn, Zachary [Rep.-R-IA-3]

I will be covering HR 4365, HR 4367 and HR 4387.

I will be watching the remaining spending bills for language that specifically cover cybersecurity provisions not dealing with internal agency cybersecurity.