Having spent the past few weeks sparring with Republican critics in the House, U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson will get a bit of a breather this week while visiting appropriators in the Democratic-controlled Senate, where lawmakers have been reluctant so far to make major cuts to the agency's budget.

Republicans in the House have said they want EPA's spending to go back to 2008 levels, which would entail a 30 percent cut from the agency's $10.2 billion budget for fiscal 2010. But if the Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee have a complaint about EPA's requested budget of $9 billion, it is that the agency would lose too much money.

During previous hearings, Senate Democrats have taken EPA to task for its request, mainly focusing on a proposed $950 million cut to a pair of revolving funds that provide money for state and local agencies to upgrade their water infrastructure.

Though the appropriations process for fiscal 2012 is just getting started, the debate over EPA has been playing out already, as the House and Senate try to hash out a spending deal for the rest of the current year.

"I agree -- we've got to fix the nation's budget challenges, but no American would try to balance their household budget by skimping on their kids' safety, and just the same, Congress should not be putting austerity ahead of public health," Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) said during Jackson's recent appearance before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (E&E Daily, March 3).

EPA would get $9.9 billion under the spending package that was proposed by Senate Democrats earlier this month to keep the federal government running until fiscal 2011 ends in September. It was the first spending bill put forward by Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), who took the gavel of the Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee this year when Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) left to lead the Energy and Water panel.

The Democratic proposal, along with a competing bill from House Republicans, fell short of the 60 votes needed to advance last week.

They are $2 billion apart on EPA funding, forming one of many fronts in the ongoing budget battle. While the Republicans argue that no agency should be spared from funding cuts, Democrats say that EPA isn't the cause of the deficit and isn't the place to save money.

So far, the administration has tried to position itself somewhere in the middle.

"The president's proposed budget does make cuts, but it makes them with a thoughtfulness that is intended to ensure that we preserve the fundamental core programs that ensure clean air and clean water for Americans," Jackson testified at the previous Senate hearing, when asked how the president's proposal compares to the Republican spending bill.

Republicans also made EPA a major target of the $6 billion in cuts contained in the three-week spending bill that was unveiled by House Republicans on Friday to keep the government running while negotiations proceed. It would take away $232 million from a variety of EPA programs, most notably the agency's tribal assistance grant program, which would lose $172 million in funding.

President Obama called for a long-term compromise on Capitol Hill on Friday, saying it is "irresponsible" to run the government on two- and three-week-long spending bills.

"Both sides are going to have to sit down and compromise on prudent cuts somewhere between what the Republicans were seeking that's now been rejected and what the Democrats had agreed to that has also been rejected," Obama said. "It shouldn't be that complicated."

Schedule: The hearing is Wednesday, March 16, at 2 p.m. in 124 Dirksen.

Witnesses: EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and Chief Financial Officer Barbara Bennett.