February 10, 2009 08:23 PM UTC

Udall, Bennet Explain Senate Stimulus Cuts

• 4 Comments
• by: Colorado Pols

Three different local takes on the role of Colorado’s two Senators, Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, in the Senate economic stimulus compromise set for approval today. As the Denver Post reports:

Sen. Susan Collins, a linchpin to preventing a GOP filibuster, had as late as Wednesday decided that the right size for the stimulus wasn’t the $838 billion eventually agreed upon but just upwards of $600 billion – a number so low that almost no Democrat thought it viable…

“You could tell she was a little bit piqued,” said Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., but in the end she “laughed about it.”

“If she had reacted negatively…or decided to withdraw because Harry was pushing them or us with a little bit of trash talking, who knows what would have happened,” Udall said.

For both Udall and Colorado’s junior senator, Michael Bennet, it was the kind of high-stakes legislative drama that might come once in a career. Instead, it landed on both within their first few weeks of stepping onto the Senate floor…

Both Udall and Bennet said they joined the centrist group as part of a commitment they made to Coloradans to find pragmatic solutions and reach across the aisle. Yet the tricky negotiations also show how complicated that can be in Washington’s highly partisan environment.

Tricky indeed, as the Durango Herald picks up the story:

The compromise that saved the federal stimulus bill might come at a high cost for Colorado.

The state government, police departments and Mesa Verde National Park all could get money out of the stimulus, but the U.S. Senate’s version is less generous to all three than the original bill…

The group cut more than $110 billion out of the House version of the bill, including hundreds of millions of dollars that would have gone to the Colorado state government. If the Senate bill wins approval today, then senators and representatives will have to negotiate a final version this week.

Colorado would have received $1 billion to fix its budget from the House bill. Senators cut that amount by at least $400 million.

“Clearly we need to provide some help to the states, but it has to be done in a way that will create jobs and not solely fill a hole in the state budgets and allow the states to stand pat,” Udall said Thursday in a conference call between negotiating sessions.

Colorado’s problem runs deeper than a mere desire to “stand pat,” our budgetary problems are constitutionally interwoven and systemic, vital services are already strained to the breaking point–the stabilization funds would only have plugged a hole made wider by recession, not created by it. Loss of these anticipated funds would badly hurt regardless of who’s to blame, but maybe Udall thinks that’s what we need to shock the electorate out of TABOR-loving complacency.

Tough love, folks.

As for Sen. Bennet, his first sortie in the upper chamber (or elected office of any kind for that matter) garnered a mixed reception looking ahead, as everything he does must inevitably, to his upcoming bid for election. He can tout the experience of having reached across the aisle to win enough compromise for passage–but at what cost? A lot of people, from the Obama administration down to local governments around the country want to undo at least part of what they “achieved,” as the Pueblo Chieftain rounds out discussion of the stimulus bill’s next steps:

School construction money? Trying to craft a compromise bill between Democrats and at least a few Republicans, the Senate agreed over the weekend to bring a compromise bill to a vote Tuesday that erases the $16 billion for school repairs and construction that House Democrats put in their $820 billion plan.

Colorado’s share was expected to be about $225 million, with about $8 million coming to Pueblo-area school districts based on past formulas.

State stabilization funds? That’s a fancy title for the federal government giving money to state and local governments to help them offset any steep slump in revenue that could force layoffs and reduced services. The Senate looked at the House proposal of $79 billion in rescue money over the weekend and chopped that back to $39 billion. Colorado was expecting about $1 billion in state assistance.

Highway funds? The Senate bill has $27 billion for highway projects–about the same as the House plan–although Senate Democrats tried to increase that to $40 billion but fell two vote shorts of the 60 needed to bring the amendment to the floor. Colorado’s share of that money is expected to be about $440 million and that money will be applied to the Colorado Department of Transportation priority list…

Colorado Sens. Mark Udall and Michael Bennet, both Democrats, helped craft the Senate compromise and voted Monday to bring it to the floor today for final consideration. They were rewarded when all Democrats, plus three Republican senators, voted 61-38 “for cloture,” ending debate and setting up today’s vote, when the bill can pass on a simple majority.

For Bennet, the former Denver school superintendent, helping to draft the compromise plan was his first foray into high-pressure Senate negotiations. Asked why he supported cutting school construction funds, a spokesman said that change was necessary to get any Republican votes for the bill.

“To be sure, Senator Bennet would have liked to keep the original amount of the $16 billion for school construction,” his spokesman said Monday. “But our priority was to get the support needed to move this economic recovery plan forward and across the finish line.”

Of course, some House Democrats were angered by the program cuts the Senate made in its effort to woo three GOP senators to support the measure. State stabilization funds and school construction money both were touted by House lawmakers as a high-profile way for the federal government to intervene in a slumping economy.

“I’m disappointed,” said Rep. John Salazar, D-Colo., and a member of the House Appropriations Committee that drafted much of the House plan. “Those school construction dollars and state stabilization funds were intended to provide jobs. I’m hopeful we can put some of that money back before we’re done.”