Jackson Free Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Over White House objections, the Senate is poised to pass a $612 billion defense policy bill that calls for arming Ukraine forces, prevents another round of base closures and makes it harder for President Barack Obama to close the prison for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay.

The Senate was scheduled to vote Thursday on the bill, which the president has threatened to veto.

Democrats oppose the way the bill skirts congressional spending caps and increases money for defense by padding an emergency war-fighting account that is exempt from the caps. They argue that if Republicans want to break through spending caps on defense, they should do so for non-defense spending too.

Democrats are expected to vote for the bill and save their budget fight over the use of the Overseas Contingency Operations account for separate appropriations bills. Senate Democrats' promise to block the defense appropriations bill — in hopes of forcing Republicans to the negotiating table — is a strategy that seems risky. It would put Democrats on the hook for filibustering troop pay, funds for operations in Afghanistan and combating Islamic extremists, and the rest of the Pentagon budget.

Hours before the anticipated vote, top Senate Democrats sent Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, a letter urging him to convene a mini-summit to find a path forward that would match the Pentagon budget boost with increases for domestic programs such as education, infrastructure grants and law enforcement.

Reminding McConnell that many Republicans also want to alleviate the return of automatic spending cuts called sequestration, slated to hit in the fiscal year starting Oct. 1, Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada., and his top lieutenants said it's unfair to lift the cuts only for defense.

"We write to urge you to immediately schedule bipartisan budget negotiations for next week to find a fair, reasonable and responsible path forward for funding key national priorities such as national defense and domestic investments in education, health, science, and infrastructure," the Democratic letter said. "We are alarmed that you have not displayed a greater sense of urgency to address this problem."

Sen. John McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, urged his colleagues Thursday to set aside differences about government spending and pass the measure, which authorizes money Obama requested for the Pentagon and other national security programs. He said that the world is more dangerous than it was in 2011, when the automatic spending cuts kicked in.

"The Middle East is literally on fire," McCain said, adding that senators who vote no on the bill because of a budgeting dispute have their priorities upside-down.

In a speech Wednesday on the Senate floor, McCain rattled off what he said were highlights of the legislation: a system so servicemen and women would not have to serve for 20 years before getting some retirement money; measures to ensure better accountability and curb cost overruns; $3.8 billion for Afghan security forces; accelerated shipbuilding; and upgraded fighter aircraft.

The White House, however, objects to padding the yearly war-fighting fund, which is not subject to spending caps.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter on Wednesday called it a "herky jerky" approach that ignores a need to budget money for multi-year weapons development programs, for instance.

"I travel around the world and this ... looks terrible," Carter told the House Armed Services Committee. "It gives the appearance that we are diminishing ourselves because we can't come together behind a budget, year in and year out."

The White House is opposed to provisions that would make it harder for Obama to transfer the remaining 116 detainees out of Guantanamo Bay so he can make good on his pledge to close the military prison.

The administration also objects to the bill because it does not authorize the closing of unneeded U.S. military facilities, prohibits the retirement of the A-10 aircraft that provides close air support for ground troops and forces the hand of the administration to provide lethal assistance to Ukrainian forces fighting Russian-backed separatists — something the White House has so far refrained from doing.