The Senate Saturday passed a $915 billion federal budget bill by a 67 to 32 vote, assuring the government won't shut down.

The House of Representatives passed the measure Friday. President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill, which provides funding through Sept. 30.

The bill a wide range of federal programs, and incorporates many of the cuts lawmakers agreed to earlier this year.

The Department of Homeland Security, for instance, will get $39.6 billion from the bill, $2 billion less than last year and $4 billion less than President Barack Obama's request. Among the cuts are Federal Emergency Management Agency grants to first responders.

The bill also bars funds to transfer, release or assist in the transfer or release of Guantanamo Bay detainees "to or within the United States or its territories."

Also cut were a number of labor and health and human services programs.

The Employment Training Administration will get $10.7 billion, $68 million below last year's amount and $118.9 million less than Obama sought. The low income energy assistance program, which helps poor people pay their utility bills, is due for $3.5 billion, $1.2 billion less than last year.

Other programs will see increases, notably defense, up $5.1 billion to $518.1 billion, including a 1.6 percent military pay raise and more money for health programs for troops and their families. 

The Navy today announced its making the biggest purchase of biofuels by the government to date. It’s for 450,000 gallons made from waste cooking oils from Dynamic Fuels in Louisiana and algae from Solazyme in California.

The total cost is $12 million, which works out to $26 a gallon.

The Navy plans to use it for surface ships and aircraft in a demonstration exercise next summer off Hawaii. “It’s half of what we were paying this time last year. It shows that as the market develops, you’re going to see see costs come down,” Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said on a conference call with reporters.

Mabus said the purchase is just a step but argued it’s an important one for reducing oil dependence and the budget shocks that come with buying oil from volatile places. He's been pushing for a few years for the military to create an early market for biofuels (previous story here).

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told reporters that another thing to consider in the cost-benefit analysis is the potential market for the commercial aviation industry at about 13 billion gallons of fuel a year. Vilsack said there’s a big opportunity for jobs in the future if the U.S. could supply its own non-petroleum fuel for commercial aviation and the military.

The Department of Defense budget for what it calls “energy security initiatives” has gone up to $1.2 billion. Biofuels are one of its top three programs, along with developing more fuel-efficient vehicles and adding energy efficiency and renewable energy at military bases and forward operating bases.

The drumbeat of Republican presidential candidates skeptical of President Barack Obama's Iraq policy continued Friday night.

Here's the statement of Texas Gov. Rick Perry:

"I’m deeply concerned that President Obama is putting political expediency ahead of sound military and security judgment by announcing an end to troop level negotiations and a withdrawal from Iraq by year’s end. The President was slow to engage the Iraqis and there’s little evidence today’s decision is based on advice from military commanders.

“America’s commitment to the future of Iraq is important to U.S. national security interests and should not be influenced by politics. Despite the great achievements of the U.S. military and the Iraqi people, there remain real threats to our shared interests, especially from Iran.

“The United States must remain a firm and steadfast ally for Iraq, maintaining an ongoing diplomatic, economic, and military to military partnership with this emerging democratic ally in the Middle East.

“As a veteran and commander-in-chief of national guard forces, I cannot express enough appreciation for our military service members who have protected and defended American interests in Iraq. Our Iraq war veterans made enormous sacrifices to make our nation and world safer, and I know all Americans will welcome them home with great pride and appreciation.”

Mitt Romney's offered some harsh words Friday about President Barack Obama's announcement earlier  on Iraq.

The GOP presidential candidate, in the top tier of most national polls, had this to say:

“President Obama’s astonishing failure to secure an orderly transition in Iraq has unnecessarily put at risk the victories that were won through the blood and sacrifice of thousands of American men and women.

"The unavoidable question is whether this decision is the result of a naked political calculation or simply sheer ineptitude in negotiations with the Iraqi government. The American people deserve to hear the recommendations that were made by our military commanders in Iraq.”

Longtime Iraq war critic Dennis Kucinich was not happy with President Barack Obama's Friday announcement about the war.

The Ohio Democratic congressman's statement:

"As one of the first Members of Congress to oppose the war in Iraq, I welcome the President’s announcement that he will withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq at the end of the year. The U.S. has spent over $806 billion on a war that was based on lies. The war in Iraq has cost the lives of over 4,421 U.S. troops and an estimated 1 million innocent Iraqis.

 "Yet today’s announcement fails to acknowledge that we will simply be replacing one U.S. occupation with another. Under the State Department’s current plans to take the place of the Department of Defense as the main U.S. force in Iraq post-military withdrawal, we are still maintaining a massive presence there, now with the State Department and its heavily armed private security contractors. And it is the presence of armed U.S. contractors that is the problem. It will continue to foment instability and violence in Iraq and the region. We need to get out now, not just trade uniforms and personnel. It is reasonable to ask whether the people of Iraq will notice any change."

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a leading congressional voice on military affairs, is not pleased with President Barack Obama's Iraqi troop withdrawal announcement.

 “I respectfully disagree with President Obama," Graham said.

"I feel all we have worked for, fought for, and sacrificed for is very much in jeopardy by today’s announcement," he added. "I hope I am wrong and the President is right, but I fear this decision has set in motion events that will come back to haunt our country.”

Democratic reaction was move favorable. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said, "I fully support the president."

And Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., said that he was prepared to support keeping U.S. trainers in Iraq after 2011.

"But in light of Iraq’s refusal to eliminate the possibility that U.S. troops would face prosecutions in Iraqi courts, President Obama has made the right decision," Levin said.

House Speaker John Boehner Wednesday said President Barack Obama's plan to start withdrawing troops from Afghanistan this summer should not be based on "political calcuations," as he and five other members of Congress visited Afghanistan.

After meeting with top military officials, including Gen. David Petraeus, top U.S. commander in Afthanistan, Boehner said that he was advised while "gains have been made in Afghanistan...they are fragile and reversible."

What's crucial, the Ohio Republican said, is that "we must remain steadfast in our commitment to the counterinsurgency strategy our commanders on the ground have put in place and to ensuring its success, rather than focusing on meeting arbitrary timetables for withdrawal.

"Any drawdown of U.S. troops must be based on the conditions on the ground," Boehner said, "not on political calculations."

Also on the trip are Reps. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, Mike Conaway, R-Texas, Tom Rooney, R-Fla., joe Heck, R-Nevada, and Dan Boren, D-Okla. They began the trip Saturday in Iraq.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell Monday sharply criticized President BArack Obama for his handling of the Libyan mission, saying many Americans "view our military intervention in Libya with anxiety and uncertainty."

Speaking on the Senate floor, McConnell said, people are "wondering when this operation will end, and when they're loved ones will return. And they're asking another reasonable question: What is the mission?"

Even as NATO assumes command, he said, "It's fair to ask, what is the role of our military and military alliance in providing support to an opposition that we are only beginning to understand?"

McConnell also blasted the president for not properly consulting Congress. Obama has held meetings with congressional leaders.

One person McConnell did praise was Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who also ran the Pentagon during part of President George W. Bush's administration.

"The president is fortunate to be able to call upon the wisdom of this seasoned national security expert in considering our operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and in Libya," McConnell said. "It was Secretary Gates who reminded the American people of the risks inherent in military intervention." 

How much does U.S. involvement in Libya cost?

Rep. Bruce Braley, R-Iowa, wrote President Barack Obama earlier this week, asking that question. "I firmly believe American taxpayers deserve a full accounting of the additional burden of a third conflict," Braley said, referring to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Thursday, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters: "I don't have numbers for you. I can tell you that this is what we believe, that there are contingency funds that are built into the Defense Department budget for this sort of thing."

Friday, Braley still was not satsified.

"Yesterday I asked for accountability on the question of how much this conflict is costing us, and I have yet to see a clear response from the White House," he said. "The fact that funds for contingency military operations exist doesn’t answer the question of how much we’re spending, and will continue to spend, in Libya.

"I’m not the only one asking these questions – the American people are demanding answers too. And the President must give Congress and all taxpayers an accurate answer."

Either fund the Pentagon for the rest of the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, or there will be no more short-term budget extensions, top Senate Republicans warned Wednesday.

The Senate is expected to approve later this week a three-week extension to keep the government running through April 8. The House of Representatives passed the measure Tuesday.

But after that, GOP leaders said, any further short-term fixes have to fund defense for the entire fiscal year.

"We are defending this nation on a two-week to two-week basis, and it is harming our ability to defend this nation's national security," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Added Senate GOP Leader Mitch  McConnell of Kentucky. "I can say with total confidence that we're not -- the House and Senate are not going to be passing another continuing resolution without the funding for the defense department for the remainder of this fiscal year."