The Senate voted 52 - 48 not to waive a procedural challenge to the budget cuts bill - and removed some language concerning medicaid liability and a number of government reports. Regardless of how the final vote goes, the House of Representatives will need to act again before the cuts will be finally passed.

All Democrats voted with Republican Senators Snowe, Chafee, and Smith to support the procedural challenge.

We haven't directly mentioned this yet here, but the inclusion of language opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge on the defense appropriations bill is an awful decision. Not only is the provision not related to the defense appropriations bill (and therefore should be struck through a procedural challege), but it is also a crude, callous, and reprehensible attempt by Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and other Republicans in the Senate who favor drilling in ANWR to coerce those opposed to the provision to support it because of fear as being castigated as "unpatriotic" for voting against the defense bill.

This is the ultimate stacking of the deck; it is no longer about policy and debate, but rather which side can best manipulate the rules to their advantage. Those who have conspired to hold the Defense appropriations bill hostage until the bitter end of the session to force members of Congress into a corner should be ashamed of themselves - and not because opening ANWR is bad policy. They should be ashamed simply because they are manipulating the system in a perverse Machiavellian game where the ends justifies the means, but neither are in the best interest of the country.

The U.S. Senate is supposed to be spending 10 hours today debating the budget cuts reconciliation bill. But a substantial portion of the debate has been spent sparring over the reauthorization of the U.S. Patriot Act and the inclusion of ANWR in the Defense Appropriations bill.

While these are certainly very important debates to be had, it's hard to understand why the debate is not about the budget cuts. Do Senators not have anything to say about the cuts? Do they think the changes they will vote for shortly are unimportant? Are Senators ashamed of what they are proposing in this bill?

Luckily, Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) has just got the debate back on track and is making some excellent points about shared sacrifice. You can watch live on C-SPAN 2.

Sen. Specter (R-PA) announced today that the new conference report for the Labor/HHS appropriations bill that passed the House on Wednesday will be added to the Defense appropriations bill. The reason Specter gave for this move was that there are not enough votes to pass the bill as a stand alone measure.

This is purely bad legislative process. It is a radical tactic to handcuff Senators to vote for legislation they do not support under the fear of being branded unpatriotic for delaying or not approving defense funding. Is this really what the most deliberative legislative body in the history of the world has sunk to? Coercion?

As we are currently seeing happen with ANWR, the GOP is using whatever deplorable tactics necessary, even delaying a bill funding the military for three months to use as a mechanism to pass unpopular legislation that would not have even a majority support on its own. The pressure of the holidays must really be getting to those in Congress who are desperate to pass something, anything at all, before they wrap up for the end of the year. We expect better of the U.S. Senate.

Before wrapping up this year's legislative session, Congress is expected to consider another emergency supplemental measure. Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Judd Gregg (R-NH), announced today his support for tacking on to the bill $1.14 billion in spending on border security measures.

Gregg said today the money would go mainly toward replacing helicopters and other vehicles used along the Mexican border and upgrading electronic surveillance equipment in the area as well. While it is important that lawmakers take the necessary steps to deal with the social, economic, and political impacts of a growing body of illegal immigrants, the process of emergency spending is hardly the time or place to do this. The emergency supplemental process is meant to be used so Congress can provide quick funding in the case of emergencies. Tacking other legislative priorities such as border security measures on to supplementals only circumvents the budget process and cuts down on the level of political debate awarded to the complex and important issue.

In his last speech to the Federal Reserve before retiring, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan again warned about the economic risks posed by long-term budget deficits and an escalating national debt. Greenspan described the risk of sustained deficits on the U.S. economy over the long-term as "severe" and urged swift action to begin instituting policies to correct structural problems.

Greenspan again supported budget rules, such as pay-as-you-go (PAY-GO) rules, for Congress to help "craft a budget strategy that meets the nation's longer- run needs." A few weeks ago, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) shifted his position on true PAY-GO rules and now 51 Senators are on record supporting the mechanism that helped to lower deficits and produce surpluses between 1997 and 2002.