The Budget Deal Is a Godsend to GOP Senators

Patty Murray and Paul Ryan have done the Republicans a big favor, even if they don’t want to acknowledge it publicly.

Members of the bipartisan budget conference Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (L) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) discuss their initial meeting at the U.S. Capitol October 17, 2013 in Washington, DC. Congress voted last night to fund the federal budget and increase the nation's debt limit, ending a 16-day government shutdown. 
Getty Images
Michael Catalini
See more stories about...
Michael Catalini
Dec. 12, 2013, 4 p.m.

On the sur­face, the polit­ics of this week’s budget deal might look bad for Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans. Con­ser­vat­ive groups took aim at the deal even be­fore it was form­ally un­veiled. Tea-party primary chal­lengers are lin­ing up to bash the two-year budget as in­suf­fi­ciently true to con­ser­vat­ive val­ues. And, per­haps, most naus­eat­ing to the con­fer­ence: Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id em­braced the plan and lav­ished praise on it.

Ac­cord­ingly, top Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans are tele­graph­ing their op­pos­i­tion, des­pite its pas­sage in the House on Thursday. Minor­ity Lead­er Mitch Mc­Con­nell of Ken­tucky has been mum, but he ab­hors bust­ing the budget caps. Minor­ity Whip John Cornyn of Texas, who this week got a high-pro­file primary chal­lenger in Rep. Steve Stock­man, said he’s likely to vote no. Sen. John Bar­rasso of Wyom­ing, the Sen­ate’s No. 4 Re­pub­lic­an, says he doesn’t sup­port it “at first blush.”

But ap­pear­ances can be de­ceiv­ing, and the real­ity is that the deal is likely to be very good news for Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans, par­tic­u­larly those who are wor­ried about reelec­tion next year. For once, they don’t have to be the adults in the room.

That’s be­cause most Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans can vote against the meas­ure with im­pun­ity, know­ing that it’s likely to pass with over­whelm­ing sup­port from Demo­crats and a smat­ter­ing of their GOP col­leagues in safe seats. Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans can pub­licly be­moan the short­com­ings of the deal and com­plain that it doesn’t ad­dress en­ti­tle­ment spend­ing and lacks a long-term blue­print to re­duce the de­fi­cit. In short, they can sound just as ex­as­per­ated with the budget agree­ment as their tea-party chal­lengers and con­ser­vat­ive crit­ics.

But, as­sum­ing the meas­ure passes, they can also avoid fal­lout over a gov­ern­ment shut­down like the one in Oc­to­ber, which badly hurt the GOP in opin­ion polls. “We took the brunt of the shut­down blame,” said a seni­or GOP aide. “No doubt — it’s a good thing for us.” Put an­oth­er way, if Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans blocked the budget agree­ment, they would play in­to what a seni­or Demo­crat­ic aide called “one of our fa­vor­ite nar­rat­ives on them,” ob­struc­tion­ism. “I don’t think any­body on either side wants a gov­ern­ment shut­down,” said Sen. John Booz­man, R-Ark. “We need to get this be­hind us.”

One reas­on GOP sen­at­ors are get­ting a pass this time has to do with how the budget deal was put to­geth­er. The lead ne­go­ti­at­ors, Sen. Patty Mur­ray, D-Wash., and Rep. Paul Ry­an, R-Wis., were in­tent on reach­ing an agree­ment they could sell to their re­spect­ive caucuses. Not sur­pris­ingly, Sen­ate Demo­crats have sup­por­ted Mur­ray by ral­ly­ing be­hind the plan. Al­though not as united, key mem­bers of the House Re­pub­lic­an Con­fer­ence also lined up be­hind Ry­an and voted for the deal Thursday. The pro­cess left Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans on the side­lines.

The biggest prob­lem Re­pub­lic­ans have with the Ry­an-Mur­ray plan is that it raises dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing bey­ond the $967 bil­lion level man­dated by the 2011 Budget Con­trol Act, to $1.012 tril­lion for fisc­al 2014. The deal pays for the in­crease partly through a hike in fees, an­oth­er point of GOP con­ten­tion. “If you’re really go­ing to deal with spend­ing, you have to deal with the whole budget,” said Sen. Mike Jo­hanns of Neb­raska. “Char­ging some­body more for their air­plane tick­et is not really a way to solve the budget crisis for the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment.”

Still, these new spend­ing levels — if en­acted — will take budget talks out of the con­gres­sion­al con­ver­sa­tion through 2015. For Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans, that likely means achiev­ing broad­er re­forms is off the table un­til after the midterms. “Some people are ap­par­ently will­ing to give up the spend­ing caps for just more spend­ing and no en­ti­tle­ment re­form,” Cornyn said. “That was al­ways the deal most of us hoped for — to shore up So­cial Se­cur­ity and Medi­care — and that would be worth it. But to give up the spend­ing caps for more spend­ing is a little dis­ap­point­ing.”

The fail­ure to deal with So­cial Se­cur­ity and Medi­care, however, could also work to the GOP’s ad­vant­age in the midterms, shield­ing Re­pub­lic­ans from cast­ing po­ten­tially con­tro­ver­sial votes to trim spend­ing on the pop­u­lar en­ti­tle­ment pro­grams. Opin­ion polls show that while the idea of long-term de­fi­cit re­duc­tion has wide­spread sup­port, spe­cif­ic plans to cut So­cial Se­cur­ity be­ne­fits or Medi­care spend­ing are viewed much more skep­tic­ally. With the eld­erly an in­creas­ingly im­port­ant part of the Re­pub­lic­an elect­or­al co­ali­tion, GOP polit­ic­al strategists worry about policy meas­ures that could jeop­ard­ize their back­ing.

Re­pub­lic­an mem­bers ac­know­ledge that the broker­ing of a deal could help ease the le­gis­lat­ive lo­g­jam in the Sen­ate. For in­stance, no ap­pro­pri­ations bills made it out of the cham­ber this year, and the rap­port between the parties has got­ten so frosty ever since Re­id in­voked the so-called nuc­le­ar op­tion that Re­pub­lic­ans staged a talk­a­thon on the floor de­signed to use up all the de­bate time on 10 pres­id­en­tial nom­in­a­tions. Look­ing to next year’s ap­pro­pri­ations pro­cess, GOP sen­at­ors ex­press guarded op­tim­ism at the pro­spect of keep­ing the gov­ern­ment fun­ded. “To do an ap­pro­pri­ations pro­cess, you have to have a num­ber. This will do that,” Booz­man said. “So that will al­low that pro­cess to go for­ward. That’s prob­ably the most pos­it­ive part.”

Sen. Roy Blunt of Mis­souri, the former House ma­jor­ity lead­er and whip, all but dared Re­id not to bring ap­pro­pri­ations bills to the floor next year, sug­gest­ing the ma­jor­ity lead­er was shield­ing his vul­ner­able mem­bers up for reelec­tion from tak­ing dif­fi­cult votes. “I’d like to see one of the res­ults of what hap­pens this week be that the Sen­ate for the first time since Sen­at­or Re­id be­came ma­jor­ity lead­er ac­tu­ally [does] the work the way it’s sup­posed to be done of spend­ing people’s money — bring the bills to the floor,” Blunt said.

Wheth­er Blunt gets his wish re­mains to be seen. Pro­tect­ing vul­ner­able in­cum­bents from tough votes is a long-stand­ing tra­di­tion in the Sen­ate. And, as Re­pub­lic­ans are demon­strat­ing with their re­ac­tion to the budget agree­ment, the tra­di­tion isn’t con­fined to Demo­crats.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4618) }}

What We're Following See More »
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.