Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is vowing to use Senate rules to block the entire appropriations process — an aggressive new phase in the Democrats’ legislative strategy that could invite charges that he’s creating the same kind of gridlock Reid accused Republicans of when they were in the minority.

For Democrats, the risks are worth it. By playing hardball this summer, they’re attempting to force Republicans to the negotiating table and hasten a deal to raise strict spending caps, expanding funds for programs like education and infrastructure, among other Democratic priorities.


And, ironically, being in the minority may put his party in a better position to get what he wants. If the GOP refuses to negotiate and a government shutdown occurs, the blame will likely fall to conservatives who control both chambers of Congress.

At a closed-door Democratic leadership meeting Tuesday night, Reid (D-Nev.) vowed that his caucus wouldn’t allow a single spending measure to get a floor vote, sources familiar with the meeting say. And on Thursday at noon, his top lieutenants announced their party’s intentions to filibuster and prevent Republicans from even calling up the spending measures.

“We will not vote to proceed to the Defense appropriations bill or any appropriations bills until Republicans have sat down at the table and figured out with us how we’re going to properly fund the Defense Department … and our families’ domestic needs,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) at the news conference disclosing the strategy.

The plan, if executed correctly, would deliver a huge blow to the Senate’s fledgling Republican majority, barring it from completing one of its top legislative priorities.

McConnell blasted the strategy in a statement.

“Underscoring their devotion to D.C. dysfunction, Democrats are now threatening to deny funding for the brave men and women who protect us, their families, and veterans in a childish gambit to wrest billions more for wasteful bureaucracies like the IRS,” the majority leader said. “Though their behavior is completely discordant with the real challenges facing our country, we nonetheless intend to work our way through this.”

This dynamic has played out before — but with the roles reversed. In 2013, Republicans stymied the Democrats’ transportation and housing spending bill after McConnell convinced a half-dozen Republicans who had originally backed the bill to reverse their stances and block it.

Now, though, the GOP has hoped for a return to “regular order” — where all 12 appropriations bills are individually scrutinized and passed on the floor — as a way to demonstrate Republicans can govern effectively with control of both chambers. They want to avoid funding the government with a series of stop-gap continuing resolutions and last-minute legislating.

And while many Republicans are also interested in raising the spending caps eventually — though not until much, much later in the year — they’d hoped to approve the more streamlined GOP appropriations bills first, allowing them to claim they at least tired to keep spending in check.

“Let me just suggest that we focus on the fact that we agree on 93 percent of what we’re going to spend [and] that we do as many bill as we can before we stop the train and do the spending discussion,” implored Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) at a hearing several weeks ago.

Republicans in both chambers are working on spending bills that give the Pentagon more money, skirting 2011 spending caps by tucking the money into a separate war fund.

But President Barack Obama and the Democrats want dollar-for-dollar funding boosts for domestic priorities, too — and they’re betting that gumming up the appropriations process will force the GOP to make a deal.

“Do we have to go through this process … taking this to September or November? Or can we sit down now, in a timely fashion, and work this thing out?”asked Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois. “Let’s start this conversation. We all agree there is an issue.”

Obama has promised to veto their appropriations measures, but the latest Democratic strategy means those bills wouldn’t even make it to his desk.

“We will not vote to proceed to the Defense appropriations bill or any appropriations bills until Republicans have sat down at the table and figured out with us how we’re going to properly fund the Defense Department,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer. | Getty

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) said some kind of Democratic stand is necessary to “reinforce the president’s veto threat and … compel a negotiation over the future of the budget.”

Republicans will no doubt call Democrats obstructionists, accusing them of flirting with a government shutdown. But Democrats are already playing defense, suggesting at a Thursday news conference that refusing to move to a deal immediately would hurt military families and veterans.

Plus, they warn, time is of the essence.

“Every day that goes by without an agreement to replace sequestration in a responsible way is a day that makes it tougher,” said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), calling GOP insistence on moving their own spending bills a “waste of time.” She and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) took a full two months to hammer out the first agreement to lift the caps in 2013, she said — a pact that many lawmakers hope can be recreated this year. “It’s getting us, every day, closer to a meltdown.”

Whip Durbin told POLITICO that he and leadership had not whipped the count yet to ensure the entire party was on board, and when asked whether it would be easy to do so, Durbin responded with a terse, “No — nothing’s easy.”

But Democratic leaders already have a number of key lawmakers lined up, including former Appropriations Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, who is currently the ranking member on the panel.

“I want to put the chairman on notice: The president will veto bills at this allocation, and Democrats will vote against motions to proceed to these bills on the Senate floor,” the Maryland Democrat warned at a recent spending mark-up. “We need a sequel to Murray-Ryan, and we need it sooner rather than later.”

Senate Armed Services ranking member Jack Reed stood with leadership at the Thursday news conference, suggesting the defense-minded Rhode Island Democrat also backs the strategy. And Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, another Democrat with a keen eye for military needs, says she’s also in.

“I certainly am inclined to vote against [the motion] to proceed to appropriations that’s going to damage our military permanently by not dealing with the base budget needs,” she said. “The appropriations bill is really where the fight will come.”

Across the Rotunda, House Democrats under Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi are also playing offense. Though chamber rules don’t allow them to muck up the process like senators in the minority can, the California Democrat also promised at Tuesday night’s meeting that Democrats would continue to oppose House appropriations bills in large swaths to ensure Republicans cannot claim they have a veto-proof majority.

She also suggested that Democrats need to push for revenue increases to offset a portion of the cost associated with raising spending caps.

“What we have done is come together with a unified message of the folly of this budget’s austerity,” said House Democratic appropriator David Price (D-N.C.). “At some point there’s going to be some sort of budget agreement … so what’s it going to take to precipitate that action?”

House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers, when asked whether such a strategy would quicken work toward a deal, shrugged.

“I don’t know,” said the Kentucky Republican, who’s been calling for a deal to raise the caps for a few months now. “We’re going to continue with what we’re doing. We’re working at a record pace, and we’ll just have to see.”

Jeremy Herb contributed to this report.