U.S. House and Senate members returned to work Tuesday, no better equipped to handle basic tasks of governance than they were before their unusually long summer recess.

You might think funding to combat a public health emergency would be easy to pass even in a hyper-partisan, election-year atmosphere. But you would be wrong, because legislation to pay for a Zika virus response remains tied up over “poison pills.”

Reasonable minds can differ on whether President Barack Obama’s $1.9 billion request for Zika funding in February was was too broad, with too few strings attached. House and Senate Republicans objected to giving the administration a “blank check” to create a “slush fund” that could be used for other activities. Fair enough. Pass a Zika funding bill with tighter limits on when and where the money can be spent. Just do it quickly, because

The Zika virus has been conclusively shown to cause microcephaly and other birth defects when it infects pregnant women. It’s also strongly suspected of causing other problems, such as Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

The administration had hoped to use the money it requested to help fund a massive response, particularly ahead of the warmer months when the mosquitoes that carry the Zika virus breed and spread.

Republicans initially didn’t want to pass a supplemental spending bill for this purpose. As Mike DeBonis reported for the Washington Post in late April, “Republicans are standing firm, arguing that the issue can be dealt with in next year’s spending process”–in other words, attaching Zika funding to other appropriations bills for the 2017 fiscal year, which begins on October 1.

Meanwhile, the White House “moved to redirect $589 million in existing funds to Zika, most of it from Ebola response programs. Funds were also taken from other emergency preparedness programs, which has state and local jurisdictions warning that they may be unable to address other non-Zika threats.”

Soon GOP leaders in both chambers shifted gears, allowing votes on current fiscal year funding. Senators approved a compromise on May 17 to attach $1.1 billion in emergency financing to a 2016 appropriations bill. That money could be used anytime through the end of fiscal year 2017. All of the Senate Democrats voted for that bill, along with 22 Republicans–mostly from the South, where the virus was expected to hit hardest. Iowa’s Chuck Grassley and Joni Ernst were among the Republicans who opposed that bill. Neither senator commented publicly on the issue at the time, even though Grassley’s office issued seven press releases on May 17 and another six the following day.

Instead of voting on the Senate compromise, House GOP leaders rolled out a plan allocating $622 million for “federal research, prevention and treatment efforts for the next six months.” On May 18, House members passed that bill on a mostly party-line vote of 241 to 184 (roll call). Iowa’s four representatives split as one would expect, with Republicans Rod Blum (IA-01), David Young (IA-03) and Steve King (IA-04) supporting the limited Zika funding. Democratic Representative Dave Loebsack (IA-02) voted against the bill, which Obama had threatened to veto. David M. Herszenhorn reported for the New York Times,

The White House condemned their refusal to consider the Zika virus a health emergency that warrants new spending without corresponding cuts.

“It is woefully insufficient given the significant risk that is posed by Zika,” the White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, said. He added, “The House of Representatives is three months late and more than a billion short of doing what’s necessary to protect the American people.”

Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, the C.D.C. director, was similarly incensed. “This is no way to fight an epidemic,” he said in a telephone interview.

“We’re scraping together dollars to try to move as quickly as possible,” he said. “We’re borrowing money from other programs. We’re writing short-term contracts. We can’t make long-term commitments to families to follow their kids. We can’t do long-term studies on how to stop the mosquito. We want to put together a whole package on how to kill inside, outside, how to kill larvae, how to do what works best. And it’s not possible under the House version.”

Fast-forward to June. Pressure was building to pass some Zika funding before the July 4 recess. Republican negotiators from both chambers worked out a deal to allocate $1.1 billion toward Zika efforts as part of the fiscal 2017 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill. Of that $1.1 billion, $230 million was allocated for vaccine development and $476 million for mosquito control.

In contrast to the Senate measure Democrats had supported the previous month, the new legislation swept $750 million in funds from other federal health programs, some related to the 2010 health care reform law, others intended to prevent outbreaks of the Ebola virus. Even worse, Christina Cauterucci reported for Slate,

Republicans devoted no resources to the distribution of contraceptives and condoms and stipulated that none of the Zika-prevention funding should go to Planned Parenthood or other family planning groups. Instead, the funding will go toward diagnostic efforts, mosquito control, and vaccine development.

Since Zika can be transmitted through sexual contact, condoms are an important tool in stopping the spread of the virus once mosquitos or travelers bring it to U.S. shores. Condoms and other forms of birth control are critical to the fight against Zika—the virus isn’t a grave threat to adults (it causes symptoms in only one out of every five people who contract it), but it causes miscarriages and birth defects, including microcephaly, in developing fetuses.

In addition, the new version of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill removed language House members had approved in May to restrict Confederate flag displays at VA cemeteries. You heard that right: Republican negotiators used the Zika funding bill to reopen a divisive debate on whether federal funds could be “used to fly Confederate flags at veterans’ cemeteries.”

House members approved that bill around 3 am on June 23, mostly along party lines, after a long Democratic sit-in demanding votes on gun control bills. Blum, Young, and King supported the Zika funding measure, while Loebsack opposed it. Five days later, most of the Senate Republicans, including Ernst and Grassley, voted to invoke cloture on the bill. However, a Democratic filibuster stopped the legislation from reaching the 60-vote threshold.

Grassley didn’t issue a statement on the failure to send a Zika funding bill to the president before the July 4 recess. Ernst commented in a June 28 press release,

“I’m disappointed that my colleagues would stand in the way of passage of critical appropriations for Military Construction and the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as emergency funding to combat the Zika virus.

“As we honor and celebrate our nation’s independence, we are reminded of the promises made to our servicemembers and veterans who have sacrificed so much for our freedom. This legislation includes funding that works to provide quality care for our veterans through reforms to improve claims processing, support for veterans’ caregiver services, homeless veterans’ assistance, added whistleblower protections, and the construction of military hospitals and health facilities.

“Additionally, it is imperative that we work to treat and prevent the spread of the Zika virus. This emergency provision will provide additional funding to the Centers for Disease Control, and incentivizes manufacturers to develop vaccines and treatments for the virus. The legislation will also boost mosquito control by removing layers of bureaucracy so our local communities can more efficiently and effectively tackle this problem.

“Finally, this legislation includes necessary accountability measures to ensure fiscal responsibility and effective oversight of the taxpayer funds spent to address this important public health issue. I urge my Democratic colleagues to put politics aside and work with us to pass this these critical measures.”

Remember, Ernst herself had voted against emergency Zika funding six weeks earlier.

When lawmakers returned to Washington after Independence Day, they had little time to work before a scheduled seven-week summer recess. That’s about two weeks longer than the usual break. The Senate is “on pace to work the fewest days in 60 years,” Politico’s Burgess Everett and Seung Min Kim noted earlier this year. The House working schedule for 2016 is noticeably light as well.

Senate leaders tried to bring the House Zika funding bill to the floor again, despite a veto threat from the White House. On July 14, Democrats filibustered another cloture motion. Like almost all the Senate Republicans, Ernst and Grassley voted for cloture. As Jordain Carney’s story for The Hill showed, everyone got a good talking point out of the stalemate.

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) sent a letter to [Majority Leader Mitch] McConnell on Thursday asking him to delay the summer break until after they get an agreement on Zika funding.

“Attached to this bill are several highly-partisan provisions that make the entire measure unpassable in its current form — regardless of how many times the Senate is forced to vote on it,” he wrote in the letter. “This political gamesmanship has to end.” […]

[McConnell]’s pressed Democrats for weeks to cave in the funding fight, arguing the conference deal — which has already passed the House — is currently the only way to get a bill to Obama’s desk.

McConnell added Thursday that Democrats are putting “partisan politics before pressing issues like national security and Zika.”

“This is a serious crisis that demands serious solutions. It’s time for our friends to start worrying less about pleasing outside political groups and start worrying more about actually helping the Americans who are counting on us,” he said.

The statement Ernst released on July 14 echoed McConnell: “I am deeply disappointed my colleagues in the Senate once again blocked critical funding to combat the Zika virus and provide quality care for our veterans. It is our responsibility to move the American people’s priorities forward – in a fiscally responsible way – and not succumb to partisan politics, especially at the expense of those in need of immediate care and assistance.”

Who chose to use this crisis to make a statement about Planned Parenthood? Who seized on the Zika funding bill to reverse an earlier decision by House members to limit Confederate flag displays? If Ernst was worried about people “in need of immediate care and assistance,” she should have pushed for removing poison pills from appropriations bills. I didn’t hear her object to the Senate adjourning for seven full weeks either.

On the first day of work after Labor Day, McConnell tried to invoke cloture on the Republican Zika funding bill for a third time. Senate Democrats filibustered again. I enclose below the official statements from Grassley and Ernst, who both accused Democrats of using the controversy for political gain. Neither acknowledged that this dispute could have been resolved months ago if GOP leaders had paid for the tools public health experts say they need to stop the spread of the virus. Igniting a debate over federal funds for contraceptive services produced predictable results.

Now Congress has less than a month to pass a continuing resolution to keep the federal government funded beyond the end of the fiscal year on September 30. Presumably that legislation will include Zika money. Trouble is, the cost of doing nothing rises with each passing week. Emmarie Huetteman and Sabrina Tavernise reported for the New York Times on September 7,

Calls for additional funding gained urgency last week when Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, announced that his agency has used almost all of the $222 million it was allocated to fight the virus. He warned that some plans, such as a mosquito control program in hard-hit Puerto Rico, would have to be axed without more money soon.

Florida, in particular, has been burning through funds quickly, undertaking the costly work of spraying and otherwise controlling the mosquito population, and health experts worry that another cluster of cases elsewhere might cost more money than they have.

The Republican-driven package was supposed to resolve the differences between a bipartisan Senate plan and a less Democrat-friendly House version. The bill would exclude Planned Parenthood from the list of providers that get new funding for contraception to combat spread of the virus, which can be sexually transmitted.

Democrats regard any restriction on Planned Parenthood as setting a dangerous example, and they have shown they are willing to risk looking as if they are blocking funding for a public health crisis to prevent that precedent.

No wonder the approval rating of Congress hasn’t topped 20 percent in years.

UPDATE: Grassley’s Democratic challenger Patty Judge told reporters on September 7 that Grassley has “played a shameful partisan game.”

“As a former nurse, I find it beyond irresponsible that Grassley would tie emergency funding to combat this virus with a partisan attempt to reduce health care for women,” Judge said. […]

“This is the kind of behavior that Iowans are sick and tired of and Iowans aren’t forgetting that Chuck Grassley is no longer doing his job,” Judge said.

Press release from Senator Chuck Grassley, September 6:

Zika Funding Obstruction from Minority Party is Politically Driven

Last week, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) pressed the Obama Administration on why it appears that billions of dollars in unobligated funds aren’t being directed to a Zika response. The Administration, via Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell, responded but did not address the senators’ questions about redirecting billions of dollars of available funds to the Zika response. Grassley made the following comment on Senate Democrats’ vote today to refuse to proceed to a House-approved bill to fight Zika.

“It seems that the Senate Democrats want a political issue, not a solution. They want to overlook that the Administration can’t or won’t discuss using existing money to fight Zika and why the agencies that are meant to protect the public from these outbreaks seem to be caught so flat-footed by Zika. They also want to overlook that both houses of Congress are willing to fund significant amounts of additional Zika funding. Instead, they want a blank check, knowing that won’t happen, so they can pretend fiscal conservatives don’t care about women and children. It doesn’t make sense except as a political stunt. I’ll keep pushing for what’s really needed.”

Press release from Senator Joni Ernst, September 6:

Senator Ernst Supports Critical Funding for Military, Veterans, and Zika

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA) today released the following statement after again supporting the conference report on the Zika Prevention and Response Act, the Fiscal Year 2017 Military Construction and Veterans Affairs (MilCon/VA) Appropriations Act, and the Department of Defense Appropriations Act:

“Today the Senate again took up legislation that would provide funding to combat the Zika virus, provide quality care for our veterans, and ensure our troops out on the front lines have the resources they need. Unfortunately, rather than work across the aisle on these important measures, Senate Democrats continue to play politics at the expense of public health as well as the health and safety of veterans and our troops.

“As Zika spreads and the number of Zika-infected Americans reaches the thousands, Senate Democrats must set aside the political rhetoric and support these commonsense measures. It is imperative we act now to provide funding to treat and combat this terrible virus.

“In addition, Senate Democrats blocked funding for the safety of our troops and care of our veterans by voting down the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act, and the Department of Defense Appropriations Act. Our servicemembers and veterans do not fail us, yet Senate Democrats are willingly failing our men and women by refusing to do their job.

“These are critically important issues to the American people and I will continue to support fiscally responsible solutions. It is my hope that my Democratic colleagues will put politics aside and work with us.”

Iowa Democratic Party press release, September 6:

Iowa Senators Grassley & Ernst Play Political Games With Public Health Crisis

DES MOINES –As the Zika virus continues to spread, tonight Iowa’s U.S. Senators voted for a bill that would shortchange funding to combat the growing epidemic and cut vital funding for women’s health services. Their continued obstructionism comes nearly 200 days after President Obama requested $1.9 billion to fight against the Zika virus and with 15 reported cases of the virus in Iowa.

In response to today’s votes, Iowa Democratic Party Chair, Dr. Andy McGuire, issued the following statement:

“As a physician and a public health advocate, I understand how quickly a virus like Zika can become a national epidemic. As the mother of seven children, I believe that protecting our children and their health should be above the political fray. Extreme, partisan legislation should not be a part of the debate when addressing a national health risk.

“It is disappointing to watch Iowa’s GOP Senators vote for a bill that would only partially fund the fight against the Zika virus and would punish women in Zika affected areas by limiting their access to health services.

“Shame on Grassley and Ernst for not standing up to their fellow Republicans and demanding a stand-alone, fully funded bill. A public health emergency demands immediate action and rapid response. It is not the time to play political games and attach partisan amendments to a bill that could literally save lives. Grassley’s vote is just another example of his refusal to break ranks with Republican leaders and do the right thing. After playing games with the Supreme Court for 174 days, it appears Grassley is applying the same strategy to our nation’s public health crisis.”