By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent
WASHINGTON - The Republican-controlled House voted to shield greenhouse-gas polluters and privately owned colleges from federal regulators on Friday, strengthening the pro-business emphasis of legislation that also would chop $61 billion from government spending.
But as a final vote neared on the sweeping measure, newly elected conservatives suffered a rare setback when a split among rank-and-file Republicans sank a move to cut an additional $22 billion.
"The American people have spoken. They demand that Washington stop its out-of-control spending now, not some time in the future," declared Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., one of the 87 newly elected Republicans who have moved aggressively to attack federal deficits and reduce government's reach.
But for other Republicans, the extra $22 billion was a step too far.
"Rather than make careful decisions on specific program the. amendment hits everything indiscriminately in a heavy-handed way," said Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Ky., and principal author of the broader measure. "We were elected to make choices, not run on automatic pilot."
At the end of a week of sessions stretching well past midnight, the House moved toward a final vote on the $1.2 trillion bill that is needed to keep the government in operation when existing funding authority expires on March 4.
The measure, packed with cuts to hundreds of federal programs and terminations of others, faces a veto threat from President Barack Obama and implacable opposition from majority Democrats in the Senate. As a result, it is unclear how much of it will ever become law.
At the same time, it has spawned an intensifying political struggle over spending, with current funding for federal agencies due to expire in two weeks.
Republicans and Democrats have already accused each other of favoring a government shutdown when funding expires, and the two sides are maneuvering for political advantage in anticipation of talks on a short-term extension that will be needed.
The flurry of decisions during the day, combined with votes cast earlier in the week, underscored the impact on the House of the 87 freshmen who were elected to their first terms last fall with tea party support.
On a vote of 240-185, the House approved a provision that would block Planned Parenthood from receiving any federal money. Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who proposed the move, said, "It is morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use them to fund organizations that provide and promote abortion."
Debate over the issue grew intense Thursday night, when Rep. Christopher Smith, R-N.J., read a description of a graphic second-trimester abortion procedure on the House floor.
Rep. Jackie Speier, D-Calif., responded with an emotional speech disclosing having undergone an abortion as her 17-week pregnancy was failing. "For you to stand on this floor and to suggest as you have that somehow this is a procedure that is either welcomed or done cavalierly or done without any thought is preposterous," she said.
Under current law, federal funds may not be used for abortions except in the cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in danger.
Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., said the GOP proposal would "make it harder to access pap tests, breast exams, routine gynecological examinations, flu vaccinations, smoking cessation services, cholesterol screening, contraceptives and all of the other services that Planned Parenthood provides."
On another front, Republicans voted three times in slightly different ways to ban the use of federal funds to implement the year-old health care law. The House has voted previously to repeal the new law.
The move to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse-gas polluters came from Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who said his congressional district is home to more oil refineries than any other.
"We're in the midst of a massive economic downturn and the last thing we need to do is shoot ourselves in the foot with unnecessary, expensive new regulations that are on business and industry," he said.
But Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., said the proposal was the worst of a series of regulation-negating provisions backed by Republicans.
Citing a widespread scientific consensus that greenhouse gases cause climate change, he said, "This amendment bars EPA from acting, from carrying out its responsibilities."
Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., backed the move to block the Obama administration from enforcing a proposed regulation setting requirements for schools in order for their students to receive federal loans or grants. The requirements involve the amount of debt students accumulate and their earning potential after graduation.
Kline said the proposed rule had triggered a public outcry, and he labeled it "an outright attack on the private sector" that was costing jobs and would continue to do so.
But critics said the for-profit private schools run up large profit margins while leaving students with unmanageable debts after they graduate. The colleges enroll only about 10-12 percent of students in the country, yet receive 23 percent of all federal loans and grants.
Kline's proposal was approved on a vote of 289-136, and, a short while later, Republicans assured approval of Poe's restriction on the EPA, 249-176.
The votes marked the latest evidence of the anti-regulation bent of the new GOP majority.
On Thursday, the House voted to block regulations governing the emission of mercury from cement plants and to stop the Federal Communications Commission from enforcing proposed regulations opposed by Verizon and other large Internet Service Providers.
---
Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor and Alan Fram contributed to this story
Controversial proposals in House GOP spending bill
The Associated Press
The House Republicans' $1.2 trillion bill for financing federal programs the rest of the year is littered with spending cuts and prohibitions that make a showdown with President Barack Obama and Senate Democrats inevitable this year.
Among the biggest flashpoints are provisions that would:
-Cut about $60 billion in spending from last year's levels in a wide swath of domestic programs, including education, environmental protection and community services.
-Block money to implement Obama's health care overhaul law enacted last year.
-Bar federal funds for Planned Parenthood, which provides abortion and family planning services with its hundreds of clinics across the U.S. The organization says 90 percent of the $363 million a year it receives in government aid comes from Washington or the federal-state Medicaid program.
-Eliminate federal family planning and teen pregnancy prevention grants.
-Block federal aid to overseas groups that provide abortions or counsel women about them.
-Cut the Social Security Administration, which the agency has warned might force it to furlough workers. Democrats say furloughs would slow the flow of benefits to program recipients, while Republicans say offices would not close and call such threats political fear-mongering.
-Prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from imposing regulations curbing emissions of gases that cause global warming.
-Stop the Federal Communications Commission from preventing broadband providers from interfering with Internet traffic on their networks.
-Reduce Pell Grants for lower-income college students by $5.6 billion, which the White House says would reduce the maximum $5,550 grant by $845.
-Cut $747 million in food aid for poor pregnant women and women with children up to the age of 5.
-Eliminate federal money for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
-Halt financing for the Americorps national service program, which pays people to do public service jobs and encourages volunteerism.
-Limit this year's budget for the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to $80 million. It would also cut the budgets of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, charged with enforcing other parts of the financial overhaul law.
-Prevent the administration from enforcing a proposed rule making it harder for students at for-profit colleges to get federal loans and grants. Critics say the schools make huge profits while their students accumulate unusually large debts.