House Republicans are expected to move quickly this week to install a new head of the powerful House Appropriations Committee, as the party looks to get a strong start crafting plans for how to fund the government next year.
The House Republican Steering Committee is set to consider a new chair for the panel upon the lower chamber’s return from recess Tuesday, just weeks after Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) said she would be stepping down as chair.
Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), head of the subcommittee that crafts funding for transportation and housing programs, is seen as an early favorite for the coveted seat and has already been looking at some of the changes he hopes to see if elected in the coming days. That includes getting Congress to finish its annual funding work on time this year.
“No. 1 thing is to get the work done and put the leadership in a position to make the decisions that they want to make,” Cole said in a Monday interview.
But he also acknowledged that given the current pace of appropriations work in both chambers — and as Washington prepares for the coming election cycle — Congress is again likely on track for some kind of stopgap in September, when government funding is set to expire.
“What normally happens in an election year is the winners essentially decide do we want to finish our business between now and the end of the calendar, or do we think we have some political advantage by waiting later, and do we want to kick them into early next year?” Cole said.
“I never liked that. It doesn’t matter if we win or lose. I’ve been on both sides of this before, and I will say I think it’s almost always a mistake to push them into the next year because you really put the next Congress behind the eight ball,” he said.
Cole added that the change in administration “doesn’t make that much difference in the writing” of the 12 annual appropriations bill, noting the final product is going “end up being somewhat bipartisan because you got to get to 60 in the Senate.”
His comments come weeks after Congress finally put a bow on its annual appropriations work for fiscal 2024 in March, roughly six months after the initial deadline following a nasty months-long spending fight.
The legislation’s passage capped off months of tense bipartisan spending negotiations in the divided Congress, as well as intraparty fights in the House, where hard-line conservatives came out strongly against it.
Before Congress left for recess last month, the House Appropriations Committee held multiple hearings to prepare for fiscal 2025 as many Republicans are anxious for another try at further restraining government funding and securing conservative policy changes.
In her letter announcing her decision to step down as chair, Granger pointed to the coming November elections and the impact that would have on this year’s appropriations fight.
“Recognizing that an election year often results in final appropriations bills not getting enacted until well into the next fiscal year, it is important that I do everything in my power to ensure a seamless transition before the FY25 bill development begins in earnest,” Granger wrote.
The Steering Committee is set to vote on Granger’s replacement Tuesday afternoon, sending its recommendation to the House GOP conference soon after. Cole is running unopposed for the seat and has already notched backing from a chunk of the lower chamber’s other GOP spending cardinals and some conservatives.
The Steering Committee comprises more than two dozen lawmakers, including leadership, committee and subcommittee chairs, and other representatives. The body determines most committee assignments.
Cole, who noted he has served on the committee multiple times since 2006, has “good friends” on the panel and is confident his bid is in “good shape.”
In other words, Cole is confident about his chances this week. But that doesn’t mean there hasn’t been some resistance to the idea of a speedy election without certain changes.
One spending cardinal, Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), chair of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees funding for departments of Health and Human Services and Labor, called for the Republican Party to hold off on a speedy election for the panel’s next leader.
At the time, Aderholt called on Republicans to agree to a broader strategy for spending bills before selecting a new chair.
“Instead of hastily selecting a new Appropriations Chair, I believe that now is the time to focus on correcting the process and developing our theory of government on how we will manage our responsibilities,” he wrote in a letter to his colleagues last week.
Aderholt, the most senior Republican on the House Appropriations Committee that hasn’t served as chair, also reiterated the need for reforms in a follow-up piece published Tuesday in Roll Call.
“The election of an Appropriations Committee Chair is an opportunity to take stock of how it’s working, and how it isn’t. While I thank Chairwoman Granger and Vice Chairman Cole for their leadership in helping us navigate these challenging times, ultimately, we are at a decision point,” he wrote. “We need to start our FY25 work now, but to do so without changes almost guarantees a December lame duck session driven by Democrat spending decisions.”
Aderholt was one of more than 100 Republicans who voted against a sprawling $1.2 trillion package funding swaths of the federal government last month due to his opposition to funding earmarked for projects over issues related to abortion and immigration.
His opposition came as conservatives in both chambers sharply denounced the use of earmarks, which allow members to secure funding for community projects back home, in the package, as well as the overall price and scope of the funding package.
“In my years of service on the Committee, I never once voted against my own bill while Republicans held the Majority — until this year,” Aderholt wrote Tuesday.
“This may seem trivial to some, but here’s why it should matter to everyone: if the leader of one of the largest subcommittees in Congress cannot recognize the bill he is voting on from the one his subcommittee approved, what hope is there for his colleagues, let alone the American public?”