WASHINGTON \u2014 Some senators have tried to ban the process. Others simply say it\u2019s the worst part of their jobs.<\/p>\n
Even Senator Robert C. Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat who created and fortified some of the chamber\u2019s most complex rules before his death, warned the so-called vote-a-rama process could \u201csend some old men to their deaths.\u201d<\/p>\n
Still on Tuesday, as the Senate turned to a $3.5 trillion budget blueprint that begins the Democrats\u2019 push to expand the social safety net, the tradition of considering hours upon hours of nonbinding budget amendments will once again get underway \u2014 with senators forcing politically sensitive votes on their rivals as campaign operatives compile a record for possible attack ads.<\/p>\n
Only one vote really matters: If all 50 Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents give final approval to the blueprint, Senate committees can begin work this fall on the most significant expansion of the safety net since the 1960s, knowing that legislation cannot be filibustered under the Senate\u2019s complicated budget rules.<\/p>\n
But before that final vote, which could come at the crack of dawn Wednesday, senators will have to deal with a blizzard of advisory amendments, and like every vote-a-rama that preceded it, it will be painful.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s a little bit like an extended visit to a dentist,\u201d said Ross K. Baker, a professor of political science at Rutgers University. \u201cThe whole process is an exercise in \u2018gotchas.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
The Budget Act limits Senate debate to 50 hours on a budget resolution, but over time the Senate has developed its vote-a-rama custom, which allows for an accelerated voting procedure on amendments even after the 50 hours have expired. In recent years, the practice has allowed one minute of debate for each amendment followed by a 10-minute vote.<\/p>\n
In practice, any senator can prolong the process by offering new amendments for votes until he or she runs out of steam. The result is a procedural food fight with a silly name that does little other than keep Capitol denizens up past their bedtimes and cause twinges of political pain. (Vote-a-RAHM-a? Vote-a-RAM-a? Depends on the senator.)<\/p>\n
The amendments can range from the serious to the absurd. During a debate over health care in 2010, Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, forced a vote banning coverage of erectile dysfunction drugs for convicted sex offenders as a way to try to embarrass Democrats who supported the legislation. That prompted Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, to condemn the amendment as a \u201cmockery of this Senate.\u201d<\/p>\n
But the power of the political \u201cgotcha\u201d is diminishing with overuse. This is the third vote-a-rama this year alone. During the last episode in March \u2014 the longest open vote in modern Senate history \u2014 the Senate entertained 37 votes on amendments. During February\u2019s vote-a-rama, there were 41.<\/p>\n
Should Democrats successfully pass the blueprint and draft a multi-trillion-dollar package, a fourth vote-a-rama is expected in the fall.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe budget resolution is usually the platform for political theater, and both sides having votes that are designed to make a statement because none of it is binding,\u201d said Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania, who plans to retire next year.<\/p>\n
Both parties have historically lamented the vote-a-rama process, but neither wants to give it up. Typically, the party in the minority \u2014 in this case, the Republicans \u2014 revel in the uncomfortable votes it can force upon the majority party that typically controls the chamber, its floor time and what gets voted on.<\/p>\n
Republicans are expected to hammer Democrats on Tuesday over the size of the spending package, the planned tax increases to pay for it and liberal proposals to rein in climate change, which they deride as part of the \u201cGreen New Deal.\u201d<\/p>\n
Already, Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, was gearing up a list of 15 amendments, including votes to add to the budget 100,000 more police officers and to promote a \u201cpatriotic education in K-12 schools\u201d that teaches \u201cstudents to love America.\u201d<\/p>\n
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, had previously vowed \u201cto ferociously attack\u201d the Democrats\u2019 plans. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, said on Tuesday that Senate staff members had processed hundreds of amendments and pledged that \u201cevery single senator will be going on the record over and over and over.\u201d<\/p>\n
Democrats largely appeared sanguine before the whole exercise. Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont independent in charge of the Senate Budget Committee, said his plan was simply \u201cto defeat all of the poison pill amendments.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s the whole point,\u201d said Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts. \u201cThey want to try to make us take what they think will be votes that they can use in television ads. This isn\u2019t about legislating. This is just about jockeying for political advantage.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019ll have to endure a certain amount of that,\u201d she added, \u201cbut we\u2019ll get the budget resolution passed.\u201d<\/p>\n
Even Republicans acknowledged that, at least with the budget blueprint, it would ultimately be a fruitless endeavor to derail a proposal that Democrats said they had the votes for.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe just continue to have conversations with colleagues on the other side of the aisle, encourage them not to support it, but I just think we\u2019re going to get rolled,\u201d said Senator Joni Ernst, Republican of Iowa. \u201cThey\u2019ll wipe the slate clean at the end of the process.\u201d<\/p>\n
Occasionally, though, a binding vote can take place. Republicans, for instance, are almost certain to insist the Judiciary Committee be cut out of the budget reconciliation process, thus blocking the inclusion of a pathway to citizenship for millions of undocumented immigrants. (But the committee\u2019s inclusion also meant a wider array of amendments could be considered under Senate rules, given the committee\u2019s expansive jurisdiction.)<\/p>\n
The votes also occasionally produce a moment of truth for politicians. After many Democrats hemmed and hawed over stating their views on a $15 minimum wage this year, a forced vote on an amendment during the vote-a-rama in March revealed seven of the chamber\u2019s more centrist Democrats opposed the increase.<\/p>\n
Despite the political risks, Mr. Baker said the votes during a vote-a-rama did not typically end up substantially hurting political candidates. Constituents tend to judge their senators on major policy issues, not votes that fly by, often after midnight.<\/p>\n
\u201cThose kinds of votes can prove to be problematic but in a torrent of amendments, I think it becomes part of the noise,\u201d he said. \u201cThat doesn\u2019t mean they\u2019re not going to be scared about it.\u201d<\/p>\n