By Alexander Bolton - 12/13/13 05:02 PM EST
The year-end budget deal is likely to pass the Senate next week even though few Republican senators have publicly backed it, leadership aides say.
A Senate GOP leadership aide said the budget pact’s prospects received a strong boost Thursday when the House passed it with more than 300 votes.
“I don’t have any reason to think it won’t pass,” said the aide. “The vote yesterday in the House that got 169 Republicans was a big vote.”
The final tally was 332 to 94, a strong rebuke to conservative groups such as Club For Growth and Heritage Action that had urged lawmakers to oppose it.
The Senate is scheduled to consider the legislation on Tuesday.
Senate Majority Leader Harry ReidHarry ReidKoch network hits Clinton for the first time The Trail 2016: Focus on the Foundation Dear Cory Booker: How's that 'Camden Rising' thing working out? MORE (D-Nev.) on Friday predicted the bill would pass.
"Well, I would think it would,” he told Bloomberg Television in an interview. “I think it would be suicide if the Republicans didn't pass it.”
When asked if every member of the Democratic Caucus would vote for it, he said, "Yeah, we'll get our votes."
A source familiar with the thinking of Senate Democratic leaders said the overwhelming House vote ended any thoughts that Senate Republicans might have had about blocking the deal.
“If they had any thought of it, it was evaporated by the vote in the House,” said the Senate insider.
Senate Democratic leaders need at least five Republicans to overcome a 60-vote hurdle and move the legislation to final passage.
So far, only Sens. John McCainJohn McCainGeneral calls McCain's Bergdahl comments 'inappropriate' Clinton enjoying edge over Trump in Silicon Valley Five takeaways from Clinton, Trump finance reports MORE (R-Ariz.) and Susan CollinsSusan CollinsPolitical bedfellows of 2016 may be strange but not unheard of Obama creates new national monument in Maine GOP senator considering Libertarian ticket MORE (R-Maine) have said they are likely to vote for the deal.
"Although it is not the budget I would have written and I am concerned about the impact on the military retirees, I do consider it a significant step forward that will prevent us from continuing to lurch from crisis to crisis," Collins told reporters.
Sen. Jeff FlakeJeff FlakePence earns GOP raves in first month as Trump VP GOP senator: Trump needs to offer specific apologies Reid: Dems could force Senate vote on Garland MORE (R), McCain’s home-state colleague, said he would vote to end debate on the legislation but not for final passage.
Democrats need at least two more Republicans to end an expected filibuster against the deal, which reduces the automatic spending cuts known as sequestration by $63 billion over the next two years.
Democratic leaders could need to round up additional Republicans if they suffer defections within their own conference. A handful of Democratic senators, including Sen. Mark PryorMark PryorCotton pitches anti-Democrat message to SC delegation Ex-Sen. Kay Hagan joins lobby firm Top Democrats are no advocates for DC statehood MORE (Ark.), a vulnerable incumbent, are wavering on the vote.
The top three Senate Republican leaders — Sens. Mitch McConnellMitch McConnellGiffords-backed gun control group endorses Toomey, Kirk Republicans say party can’t afford to cut ties to Trump McConnell calls for ObamaCare money to be used for Zika MORE (Ky.), John CornynJohn CornynThe Hill's 12:30 Report Top Republican questions Lynch on Clinton Foundation probe Baby dies of Zika in Texas MORE (Texas) and John ThuneJohn ThuneApple, Google enlisted for FCC robocall effort Fidelity denies lobbying for student loan tax break Republicans see fresh chance to overhaul telecom law MORE (S.D.) — have signaled they will vote against the package because it lifts spending caps set by the 2011 Budget Control Act.
Republican advocates of the military have pushed all year for the reduction or elimination of sequestration that would hit the military disproportionately next year.
But several pro-defense Republicans, such as Sens. Lindsey GrahamLindsey GrahamThe Trail 2016: Clinton’s ups and downs Graham: GOP being 'left behind' under Trump Thousands of Soros docs released by alleged Russian-backed hackers MORE (R-S.C.) and Kelly AyotteKelly AyotteAyotte: Trump not always honest, trustworthy NH senate candidate: 'I didn't give my best answer' on Clinton honesty Republicans slam 0M 'ransom' payment to Iran MORE (R-N.H.), have balked at the deal because it would cut pension payments to military retirees.
Working-age military retirees would see their payments drop by 1 percentage point, which veterans groups say could shave their benefits by 20 percent over the next two decades.
To help with the whip effort, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl LevinCarl LevinSenate continues to disrespect Constitution, Obama and Supreme Court by not voting on Garland As other regulators move past implementing Dodd-Frank, the SEC falls further behind Will partisan politics infect the Supreme Court? MORE (D-Mich.) released a statement Friday pledging to conduct a review of military pensions.
“We’re going to review this retiree pension issue as part of a review that we’re doing on benefits,” Levin said. “We will be reviewing this issue next year.”
“The budget, I believe, needs to be improved,” he said.
Even Republicans who usually vote for bipartisan deals on taxes and spending were slow to embrace the Murray-Ryan agreement.
Sen. Lisa MurkowskiLisa MurkowskiMcAuliffe: I wouldn't want a 'caretaker' in Kaine's Senate seat Big Oil makes a push for risky and reckless Arctic drilling GOP divided over 0M for climate fund MORE (R-Alaska) on Thursday voiced concerns about pension reductions for federal employees and military veterans as well as reforms to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). The deal would rescind funds in the SPR Petroleum Account and bar the government from accepting oil though the royalty-in-kind program.
Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), a respected voice within the GOP conference on budget matters, came out against the deal Friday.
“I have maintained that any budget deal alternative to current law must preserve the taxpayer savings of existing law. The budget agreement does not accomplish this basic goal,” he said in a statement.
Several Democrats have threatened to vote against the agreement because it does not include extended unemployment benefits. But these liberal lawmakers are likely to help Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) end a GOP filibuster.
“I have not yet decided on the budget agreement,” said Sen. Sherrod BrownSherrod BrownLame duck TPP vote could be disastrous for Dems—and America The Trail 2016: Her big night Kaine as Clinton's VP pick sells out progressive wing of party MORE (D-Ohio). “I don’t want to leave town with unemployment insurance [unresolved]. Forty thousand people in my state lose their unemployment at the end of the year.”
Brown said he would vote for a cloture motion to set up a final vote, even if he votes "no" on final passage.
Sens. Tom HarkinTom HarkinGrassley challenger no stranger to defying odds Clinton ally stands between Sanders and chairmanship dream Do candidates care about our health or just how much it costs? MORE (D-Iowa) and Bernie SandersBernie SandersThe Trail 2016: Control the Alt-Right Shift Uber to help drivers plan for retirement FULL SPEECH: Donald Trump in Tampa, Florida MORE (Vt.), an independent who caucuses with Democrats, have also said they are undecided about whether to support the bill.
Reid has promised colleagues he will make unemployment benefits the first order of business in 2014.
Centrist Democrats such as Sens. Mary LandrieuMary LandrieuLouisiana gov: Trump helped 'shine a spotlight' on flood recovery Giuliani: Trump 'more presidential' than Obama in Louisiana visit Former Dem senator thanks Trump for visiting Louisiana MORE (D-La.) and Joe ManchinJoe ManchinDem Senate candidate: Toomey 'playing politics' with guns Political bedfellows of 2016 may be strange but not unheard of Dem senator's daughter could face Congress over EpiPen price hike MORE (D-W.Va.) say they will vote "yes."
—Erik Wasson contributed to this report.