Dec. 4 (Bloomberg) -- It is a single sentence, on page 147 of the annual appropriations bill funding the White House, listed under the title ``Additional General Provisions.''

The 18-word clause eliminates the money to pay for political appointees in each federal agency whose jobs are to approve any new regulations. By cutting the money for the positions, Congress would effectively repeal President George W. Bush's 11-month old initiative.

Democrats, writing the budget for the first time since Bush took office, are using their power over the purse to thwart Bush's campaign to loosen federal regulations. Lawmakers have added fine print to must-pass appropriations bills that sets new policy goals and increases funding for regulators such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Consumer Product Safety Commission.

``It is critically important when we are facing beef recalls, toy recalls, mine collapses and workplace infringements that Congress provide the necessary resources to the relevant agencies for them to do the jobs they are required to do,'' said Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd, 90, a West Virginia Democrat.

Business interests -- including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Business Roundtable and the National Association of Manufacturers -- and their Republican allies in Congress see potentially costly new regulations in the offing. ``It's going to cost us jobs,'' said Representative Todd Tiahrt, a Kansas Republican on the House Appropriations Committee.

Catch-All Bill

The guerrilla war over regulation is a subplot to the months-long budget fight between the White House and Democrats, who plan to try to break the impasse this month by sending Bush a single catch-all spending bill that would split the $22 billion difference between the two sides. The administration has rejected the proposal.

An ``omnibus'' bill represents one of Democrats' best chances to force policy changes because such measures typically run hundreds of pages, are subject to relatively little scrutiny by Congress and must be accepted or rejected by the administration in their entirety.

``They're going to try to use these appropriations bills, and the omnibus bill, to push their agenda as much as they can,'' said Mississippi Senator Trent Lott, the chamber's No. 2 Republican.

A Preview

While Democrats haven't released the omnibus legislation and will likely make compromises with the administration, previous drafts of the spending bills provide a preview of their intentions.

Lawmakers have proposed boosting funding for regulatory agencies they say have been starved for resources. Federal workplace-safety enforcement programs at OSHA would have received a 7 percent increase under a bill vetoed last month by Bush. Last year, such funding grew by 1.5 percent, and Democrats say tight budgets have clipped OSHA's reach, cutting the number of employees covered by its inspections by 70 percent since 2000.

``You could fight three world wars in the time it takes between inspections in some industries,'' said House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, 69, a Wisconsin Democrat.

Other agencies likely to get an increase include the Mine Safety and Health Administration, which would have received a 13 percent increase under the bill Bush vetoed. The Consumer Product Safety Commission would get a 12 percent rise under a bill approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee. The House has approved raising Environmental Protection Agency funding by 12 percent over Bush's request.

One Cut

At the same time, Democrats want a 4 percent cut for the Office of Labor-Management Standards, which oversees one of their most loyal constituencies: unions. Democrats say the office doesn't need more money because Republicans increased its budget by one-third over the past four years.

Policy demands also have been written into the budgets. The House-approved EPA budget, for example, requires the agency to come up with potential greenhouse-gas rules by July and submit plans for issuing final regulations before it sends Congress its next budget request.

``It's a precursor to a cap-and-trade system,'' said Tiahrt, 56, referring to a proposed carbon-trading market that the administration opposes.

Reporting Requirement

Lawmakers also want agencies to file periodic reports to Congress charting their progress toward a host of Democratic policy goals, such as developing workplace ergonomic guidelines for a dozen industries, requiring country-of-origin labels on meat products and regulating a flavoring chemical that has been linked to lung disease.

Marc Freedman, director of labor law policy at the Washington-based Chamber of Commerce, the nation's largest business lobby, said the reporting requirement would ``commit the agency to a certain path that they might not have gone down on their own.''

Democrats are also using a tool known as ``limitation'' -- which prevents an agency from spending money on a specific activity -- to try to kill Bush's Jan. 18 executive order requiring proposed regulations to be vetted by appointees in each agency.

Representative Brad Miller, 54, a North Carolina Democrat, said the administration's plan allows ``political minders'' to block policy recommendations developed by scientists and other experts. Inserting the limitation in a must-pass budget bill, he said, would cut off funding for Bush's order. ``You can't use federal money, period,'' said Miller.

To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler in Washington at bfaler@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: December 4, 2007 00:01 EST