A handful of proposed amendments on the floor will matter. | John Shinkle/POLITICO and AP Photos 'Vote-a-rama': The ones that matter

A big chunk of the upcoming Senate budget vote-a-rama will be a waste of time — like votes on senators’ pet causes or generic partisan issues.

But there’s some good news buried in the dozens of amendments that are coming across the Senate floor between now and Friday: A handful of them will matter.


None of them will actually become law, but some will test support for important bills to come later this year or beyond. Others could define possible 2016 candidates. And others still could tell President Barack Obama whether he’s got a shot at a grand bargain.

( Also on POLITICO: Rare vote-a-rama set for Senate)

But to spare you sitting through the full slog, here’s a list of amendments to watch.

The Ryan budget

What it does: Democrats offered the latest version of Paul Ryan’s budget, which the House approved Thursday.

Why it matters: Sure, it’s a messaging vote, but one with weight.

Five Senate Republicans voted against the Ryan budget Thursday night — including tea party favorites Rand Paul of Kentucky and Ted Cruz of Texas. Maine’s Susan Collins, Nevada’s Dean Heller and Utah’s Mike Lee also said no to Ryan’s plan. That could weaken Republicans’ negotiating position in any future debt talks.

And for all the other Republicans who voted for it, Democratic ad-makers will have the easiest job in the world for next year’s Senate races.

( Also on POLITICO: House passes Ryan budget)

A telling sign: Sen. Jeff Sessions didn’t want to offer Ryan’s budget himself.

At a Thursday press conference, Sessions insisted that “I’ve supported the Ryan in the past,” but argued that the focus should stay on the Democratic plan — even though the whole point of the press conference was to call for a balanced budget. The Democrats just want to shift the focus from their budget to Ryan’s budget, he said, “and I’m not interested in doing that.”

Internet sales tax

What it does: GOP Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming is offering an amendment that endorses a bill that would help states collect their sales taxes when people buy products from out-of-state online retailers.

Why it matters: This vote isn’t likely to break along the usual partisan lines. It’s a vote of support for the Marketplace Fairness Act, a bipartisan bill, and its supporters include not just Enzi, but leading Democrats like Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota — both of whom spoke in support of the amendment Thursday afternoon.

If it gets a big bipartisan vote, the amendment could put pressure on top committee chairmen — including Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) — who don’t want to move ahead with the bill in its current form. “Our momentum is growing,” Klobuchar said in a Senate floor speech.

School choice

What it does: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) wants a vote on his amendment to promote private-school “scholarships” for low-income children. It’s based on his bill to encourage organizations to grant the scholarships by offering them tax credits.

Why it matters: It’s not really going to jump-start the school choice debate, especially in a Democratic Senate that’s wary of it. But it’s Marco Rubio — and this is the issue he chose for the star power he brings to the budget debate. That alone makes it worth watching — if not now, then for whatever he might do with the issue in 2016.

Drones

What it does: Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has filed an amendment that would fund legislation aimed at “the prevention of drone killings of citizens of the United States in the United States.”

Why it matters: It’s not clear that Cruz will even get a vote on his amendment, but if he does, it’s sure to highlight the unpredictable party alliances that have been created by the drone debate — with Republicans like Cruz and Paul joining Democrats like Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.) in sounding the alarm about the drone program. (Attorney General Eric Holder told Paul in a letter earlier this month that the president doesn’t claim the authority to use a drone “to kill an American not engaged in combat on American soil.”)

Medical device tax repeal

What it does: This one’s an actual bipartisan amendment — by Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Klobuchar — and it calls for the repeal of the 2.3 percent tax on medical devices that helps pay for Obama’s health care law.

Why it matters: Of all the anti-Obamacare budget amendments Republicans want to offer — and there are many of them — this one’s the most significant because it got a huge number of Democratic votes Thursday night. The vote was 79-20, meaning more than 30 Democrats endorsed the repeal of a key Obamacare tax. It’s a symbolic vote, but if enough Democrats sign on, Republicans are sure to push for actual repeal legislation — a top priority for the medical device industry.

Balanced budget amendments

What they do: The Republicans are hitting their balanced-budget message on two fronts. Sessions (R-Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, offered a motion Thursday night to send the budget resolution back to the committee and rewrite it so it balances the budget in 10 years. Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, also a Republican, gets at the same goal in a different way: He’s proposing a “point of order” against any budget resolution that doesn’t balance the budget, meaning it would take 60 votes to approve it.

Why they matter: They’re test votes, but if they peel away red-state Democrats who don’t want to be seen as opposing a balanced budget, they could make it harder for Obama and Democratic leaders stick with their position that a balanced budget doesn’t have to be the goal of a future debt deal. The Sessions amendment already won one Democrat on Thursday night: Joe Manchin of West Virginia voted for it.

Cost-benefit analysis

What it does: Maine’s Republican Sen. Susan Collins is offering an amendment that would resurrect a bill she introduced last year, which calls for “sensible regulatory reform” — including more thorough cost-benefit analysis for major rules.

Why it matters: It’s hard to imagine a lot of people getting stressed out about “cost-benefit analysis” — or even staying awake when someone mentions it — but that’s exactly what’s happening with Collins’s amendment. The reason: Watchdog groups like Public Citizen are worried that the cost-benefit analysis requirement would make it harder for agencies to put out rules that implement the Dodd-Frank financial reforms. They’re worried that if the Collins amendment is approved, it will become easier to pass the legislation — and harder for the financial agencies to enforce Dodd-Frank.

Ginger Gibson, Lauren French and Zachary Warmbrodt contributed to this report.

This article first appeared on POLITICO Pro at 7:16 p.m. on March 21, 2013.