Bipartisan Budget Deal Forged in House Faces Opposition in Senate WASHINGTON - A bipartisan budget deal that sailed through the House on an overwhelming, bipartisan vote is running into difficulty in the Senate, where Republicans - some furious, some conservative and some running for office - are vowing to vote against the measure, which would roll back broad spending cuts. After two years of legislation passing the Senate with bipartisan support only to implode in a conservative firestorm on the House floor, myriad Senate Republican grievances have combined in a legislative twist, threatening the comity that was supposed to end the budget wars, at least for now. The two Republican senators with presidential aspirations - Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky - are actively working up opposition. Republican senators running for re-election in 2014 and facing Tea Party challenges have all come out no or leaning no. Senator Jeff Sessions, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, is angry that his House Budget Committee counterpart, Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, left him out of the negotiations that produced the accord. And some Republicans cannot declare their support for the deal after the Democratic strong-arm tactics that changed the Senate's rules and ended filibusters of presidential nominees. "I appreciate the dilemma Paul Ryan was in, but I'm disappointed," said Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and someone who was expected to be a "yes" vote. For three years in a row, Congress has spent less on discretionary programs than the year before. Unfortunately, the deal announced this week busts these budget caps without making meaningful changes to mandatory programs, so it violates the only real progress we have made in getting our fiscal house in order. Senators and aides from both parties said Friday that they expected the two-year budget agreement ultimately to pass next week on the strength of the House's 332-to-94 vote, which lost the chamber's most conservative and liberal members. Speaker John A. Boehner was leaning on Republican senators to come around, and enough senators were still undecided to assure passage if most of them decided in favor of the bill. Some Republicans are likely to vote to break a filibuster, even if they intend to vote against final passage. That would all but ensure passage on the strength of Democratic support alone. "I'm not supporting it," said Senator Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama. I'm not going to vote for it. Some people will. It got a big vote in the House. Senator Mike Johanns, Republican of Nebraska, said: "The fact of the matter is we've got to face up to this. At the end of the day, if you believe in my crystal ball, this gets the votes. But considering the deal has been hailed for days as a critical turning point in Washington's dysfunctional descent, its difficulties are a surprise. So far, Senator John McCain of Arizona is a declared Republican supporter, with Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, a likely yes, at least to end debate and allow a final up-or-down vote. "I'm not O.K. with it, but I think it's better than shutting down the government," Mr. McCain said. The trouble with the budget deal came as the Senate worked past another political crisis. The partisan tension over a rules change that limited the power of the filibuster and infuriated Republicans eased Friday as both parties said they were calling a weekend cease-fire that will allow them to move on to more pressing issues next week like the unfinished budget and a major Pentagon policy bills. If the mood for most of the week was sour, on Friday senators seemed more exhausted than anything else, having endured two late-night sessions in a row. Because senators were on the floor at virtually all hours, they worked in shifts. Democrats occupied the presiding officer's chair while Republicans took turns speaking from the floor to denounce what they said was an effort to stifle debate and dissent.