Spin Control: Marathon budget session an exercise in futility

OLYMPIA – Of all the axioms for staying the course, my favorite is from W.C. Fields, often quoted by my late father.

“If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again. Then quit. There’s no sense being a damn fool about it.”

The rub, of course, is deciding when the effort moves from fortitude to foolery. That point was reached at different times for different people late Thursday or early Friday as the Senate debated for more than nine hours – but ultimately did not pass – its 2015-17 operating budget.

Aficionados of political kabuki watching on TVW probably found the drama compelling. For everyone else catching the news in the morning paper – which went to press long before anything but a relative handful of the 70-plus amendments had been plowed through – there may have been the same reaction sleepy spouses had as legislators and staff members made their way to bed sometime before the sun came up: “What the hell took so long? And why can they pass it Monday if they couldn’t at 2:30 a.m.?”

(Having floor debates televised live is a mixed blessing for reporters. We can no longer call from a bar to say “Hey, hon, working late because this debate is dragging on” when it’s not; verification is a click of the remote away. But it probably cuts down on the number of spouses who wake up to an unexpectedly empty space next to them in the middle of the night, expect the worst and start calling bars, hospitals or the morgue.)

In condensed version, here’s what took so long: The Senate Majority Coalition Caucus, which is 25 Republicans and one Democrat, wanted to vote on a $38 billion budget that had a bunch of things the 23 Democrats in the minority caucus didn’t like. Some points of disagreement were relatively small changes to existing wording or programs. Others were major shifts in the way that budget proposal raises or spends millions of dollars.

With 26 votes, the majority caucus, as its name implies, has a simple majority to pass things. But Democrats had amendments to change some items which would appeal to at least a few Republicans with moderate leanings on social issues or strong labor support. Enforcing strict party discipline had political ramifications. Voting no on such an amendment could be a headache to someone running for higher office, and with all statewide offices up next year, anyone with ambition has to worry about oppo research.

In an effort to keep their budget intact if a few members peeled off for any amendment to “vote their conscience,” the majority called for a rule change: Instead of a budget amendment needing a simple majority to pass, it should need 60 percent, the standard between 1983 and 2011, when a rebellion in a Democratic majority led to some moderate members voting with Republicans to make the rule more “small-d democratic.”

An interesting twist is the rule change requires only a simple majority, or as Sen. Andy Billig, D-Spokane, noted, a simple majority can vote to force a supermajority. Democrats knew that would be the eventual outcome of the GOP call for a rule change, and their amendments sprouted like dandelions, reaching about 70 when debate started. With speakers able to expound for three minutes per amendment, that was easily two and a half hours even if only one person spoke and senators shouted their “Ayes” or “Nos” as a group.

But in the Senate, a small group can demand that each senator’s name be called separately to cast a voice vote, which adds at least two and a half minutes. Democrats routinely fit that request for a roll call into their opening remarks. They also asked some bills be read in entirety, rather than the cursory first and last lines, which is standard.

Some speakers got emotional. Some joked or rhymed. Sen. Jim Hargrove, D-Hoquiam, read from Ecclesiastes and Proverbs. Sen. Mike Baumgartner, R-Spokane, who had the last amendment of the night and one of the few that passed, quoted “The Big Lebowski.” Sen. Tim Sheldon, of Potlatch, the only Democrat in the majority coalition, defended his party credentials by saying a long list of famous Ds, from Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt to Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi, would vote with him on the budget, prompting laughs from Republicans and jeers from other Democrats.

Some amendments would have added millions to the budget, others a few thousand, and a few had no fiscal impact whatsoever. If sponsored by a Democrat, all but one failed.

Republicans began moving to end debate as soon as senators introducing an amendment had their three-minute say. That motion takes just two other senators to agree, and the Republican side of the chamber was willing to stand whenever it was proposed. But Democrats could then ask for a roll call vote on actually ending debate, which takes nine to stand in agreement. They knew the debate-ending motion would pass, but it ate up another 150 seconds, and the person introducing a motion got another three minutes to close debate when it passed, followed by another roll call, which they lost. Doing the math on 70 potential reiterations of this process – plus time off for restroom breaks and coffee refills – and the budget debate seemed likely to finish when the Easter Bunny was in view.

Democrats had issues they said were important – and many voters would agree – on nondiscrimination, minimum-wage increases, protecting social services, education and women’s reproductive rights. Republicans said they had a budget that meets the needs of state residents and school kids, and cuts college tuition without imposing new taxes, all of which were being “purposely obstructed.” Each laid claim to the moral high ground while accusing the other of bad faith, but in situations like this, it seems best to take each at their word, or neither.

Most amendments failed to get a simple majority. But Democrats’ point about supermajority math was confirmed at about 1:20 a.m.

Hargrove, the top Democrat on the budget committee, introduced an amendment to approve labor contracts negotiated between the state employee unions and the governor’s office rather than the straight raises of $1,000 per employee per year the Republican budget proposes. It meant an extra $66 million over two years. It picked up six Republican votes as well as the 23 minority Democrats, but the rule required 30, so it failed 29-20. There was never a doubt the Democrats would propose such an amendment, and Hargrove said later there was never a doubt among Democrats that those six Republicans, with strong records of supporting state workers, would vote yes. The rule change killed that amendment.

When the amendments were done about 2:15 a.m., Republicans asked to vote on the budget and faced another parliamentary irony. Voting on a bill so quickly after amendments is routine but requires a suspension of the rules, which only happens if no one objects. If someone objects – and Democrats did – it requires the 30-vote supermajority to overcome that objection. No minority Democrat voted yes, and it failed 26-23. The group that complained about supermajorities all night used one to block temporarily legislation it doesn’t like, and the group that used supermajorities all night was thwarted by it. One side saw payback, the other hypocrisy.

The Senate will see the budget again on Monday, when the weekend off means only a simple majority is needed.