Liberals, Stop Freaking Out About a Grand Bargain

It’s not going to happen. Based on how little leverage each side has, any deal will mean merely minor changes.

WOODBOURNE, NY - SEPTEMBER 20: Children eat breakfast at the federally-funded Head Start Program school on September 20, 2012 in Woodbourne, New York. The school provides early education, nutrition and health services to 311 children from birth through age 5 from low-income families in Sullivan County, one of the poorest counties in the state of New York. The children receive 2/3 of their daily nutritional needs through meals, which include breakfast, lunch and snack, that are prepared at the school and served family-style in classrooms. The county Head Start program was expanded with a $1 million grant from President Obama's 2009 stimulus bill, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Head Start, administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, is the longest-running early education program for children of low-income families in the United States. 
Getty Images
Alex Seitz Wald
See more stories about...
Alex Seitz-Wald
Oct. 24, 2013, 5 p.m.

Ru­mors of a “grand bar­gain” haunt Wash­ing­ton like a nettle­some pol­tergeist, and be­cause it could in­clude en­ti­tle­ment re­form, lib­er­als are feel­ing a touch of pre-Hal­loween fright. They worry that Demo­crats will squander the up­per hand they earned in the gov­ern­ment shut­down by mak­ing a bad deal with Re­pub­lic­ans (it wouldn’t be the first time) in the bicam­er­al com­mit­tee tasked with craft­ing a budget by Dec. 13 for the re­mainder of the fisc­al year. Out­side groups such as Demo­cracy for Amer­ica are warn­ing of “a civil war with­in the Demo­crat­ic Party” if any party mem­ber so much as thinks about touch­ing So­cial Se­cur­ity. The AFL-CIO de­clared “there will be no cov­er” for mem­bers who sup­port changes to en­ti­tle­ment pro­grams.

But pro­gress­ives can put away the pitch­forks, be­cause nobody seems in­ter­ested in mak­ing whatever bar­gain emerges from the com­mit­tee very grand. “Every­one, stop freak­ing out. This is go­ing to be a small thing. Folks are go­ing to try to find a top-line num­ber and that’s about it,” says a Sen­ate Demo­crat­ic aide fa­mil­i­ar with the ne­go­ti­ations. “This is not the su­per com­mit­tee, part two.” Tax rates — where Re­pub­lic­ans would need to com­prom­ise for Demo­crats to muck about with en­ti­tle­ments — are “not something that we’re talk­ing about,” says an­oth­er Demo­crat­ic aide close to the ne­go­ti­ations, so any­thing bey­ond a mod­est deal is un­likely.

That’s why, with the so­cial-safety net se­cure for now, Demo­crats hope to get two big things out of the budget con­fer­ence. First, they want to roll back se­quest­ra­tion cuts and boost spend­ing levels, es­pe­cially on in­fra­struc­ture, to cre­ate jobs; some Re­pub­lic­ans ap­pear amen­able. Second, they want to re­place those cuts with new rev­en­ue from clos­ing tax loop­holes; if the con­fer­ence breaks down, it’ll be over how to re­place se­quest­ra­tion.

Com­ing off a fight they mostly won, Demo­crats say they want a deal but feel con­fid­ent mak­ing some de­mands, for a change. “It will de­pend on wheth­er or not our Re­pub­lic­an col­leagues are will­ing to make com­prom­ises that they have re­fused to make so far,” Rep. Chris Van Hol­len of Mary­land, the rank­ing Demo­crat on the House Budget Com­mit­tee, tells Na­tion­al Journ­al. Spend­ing cuts have doubled since the 2011 Budget Con­trol Act, thanks to se­quest­ra­tion, and Demo­crats want to get back to those earli­er levels. “The BCA is what Con­gress de­term­ined on a bi­par­tis­an basis to be a fair level of spend­ing,” Van Hol­len says.

It says a lot about how far to the right Con­gress has moved on fisc­al is­sues that Demo­crats are now hop­ing to use their new polit­ic­al cap­it­al to re­store spend­ing levels set by a deal that House Speak­er John Boehner called “98 per­cent of what I wanted.” But Demo­crats have co-op­ted the aus­ter­ity ar­gu­ment and want to pre­serve the de­fi­cit re­duc­tion achieved by se­quest­ra­tion — just in a way less pain­ful than the in­dis­crim­in­ate, across-the-board cuts.

And they have some lever­age: Se­quest­ra­tion is just start­ing to af­fect the mil­it­ary, a sens­it­ive spot for Re­pub­lic­ans, while pro­grams that Demo­crats care most about have already borne the brunt of the bur­den. “I get an ex­tra bil­lion dol­lars this year com­pared to [last] year. De­fense? They lose $23 bil­lion,” Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Lead­er Harry Re­id told, siz­ing up each sides’ pro­jec­ted losses.

Two of the Sen­ate’s biggest GOP de­fense hawks, South Car­o­lina’s Lind­sey Gra­ham and New Hamp­shire’s Kelly Ayotte, sit on the bicam­er­al com­mit­tee and have com­plained loudly about the cuts. “We need to add some money back, par­tic­u­larly for de­fense,” Ayotte said last week. What’s more, the House has had trouble passing ap­pro­pri­ations bills at se­quest­ra­tion levels. Con­ser­vat­ives sup­port the spend­ing re­duc­tions in the­ory, but they’ve balked at spe­cif­ic cuts, so Boehner wants to boost fund­ing levels as well.

The prob­lem is how to get there. Re­pub­lic­ans seek ad­di­tion­al cuts to do­mest­ic pro­grams to free up money for de­fense, but Demo­crats say they’re not go­ing to cut the likes of Head Start. In­stead, they want to use some of the nearly tril­lion dol­lars in “waste­ful spend­ing in the tax code” they iden­ti­fied in their Sen­ate budget, which in­cludes per­en­ni­al polit­ic­al foot­balls like the oil-pro­duc­tion tax cred­it and the car­ried-in­terest loop­hole. But Re­pub­lic­ans aren’t eager to be seen rais­ing taxes. “I’m pretty sure you know the House Re­pub­lic­an re­sponse to any­thing that is a net rev­en­ue in­crease,” says Wil­li­am Al­lis­on, a ma­jor­ity spokes­man for the House Budget Com­mit­tee.

And this is where talks could break down. It’s com­fort­able polit­ic­al turf for Demo­crats, who would in­ev­it­ably blame Re­pub­lic­ans for sid­ing with oil com­pan­ies and Grover Nor­quist in­stead of mak­ing a deal to keep the gov­ern­ment open. “It’s hard to take ser­i­ously claims that folks want to re­duce the de­fi­cit when they re­fuse to close a single tax loop­hole,” Van Hol­len says. But he in­sists that Demo­crats don’t want stale­mate. Com­pare their nar­row agenda to the lengthy wish list Re­pub­lic­ans presen­ted dur­ing the shut­down. They des­per­ately want a re­turn to reg­u­lar or­der, and a con­fer­ence com­mit­tee deal would be the first step. After all, Sen­ate Budget Com­mit­tee Chair­wo­man Patty Mur­ray is es­sen­tially out of a job if Con­gress con­tin­ues to fund the gov­ern­ment through con­tinu­ing res­ol­u­tions (there’s no need to write a budget).

The same could be said about House Budget Com­mit­tee Chair­man Paul Ry­an, R-Wis., al­though his am­bi­tions likely go bey­ond his chair­man­ship. In­deed, Re­pub­lic­ans sty­mied a re­turn to reg­u­lar or­der more than 21 times by re­fus­ing to make ap­point­ments to a bicam­er­al con­fer­ence com­mit­tee. But the gov­ern­ment shut­down changed that, and Demo­crats hope it’ll change the GOP’s stance on tax loop­holes as well. As one Demo­crat­ic staffer says, “It’s al­ways go­ing to be a non­starter for them, un­til the time they sign onto it.”

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4530) }}

What We're Following See More »
DOJ: North Carolina’s CB2 Violates Civil Rights Act
35 minutes ago

Department of Justice officials told North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory that "the law violates the U.S. Civil Rights Act and Title IX—a finding that could jeopardize billions in federal education funding. The department gave state officials until Monday to respond 'by confirming that the State will not comply with or implement HB2.'"

Former Sen. Bob Bennett Dies at 82
8 hours ago

Former Utah Republican Sen. Bob Bennett died of pancreatic cancer on Wednesday after a long battle with pancreatic cancer. Bennett was defeated in a primary in 2010 by Tea Party–backed Mike Lee.

Libertarians Getting a Second Look?
14 hours ago
Trump Floats Gingrich, Kasich as Running Mates
15 hours ago

Newt Gringrich is actively positioning himself as a possible VP nominee for Donald Trump, according to National Review. After a New York Times piece mentioned him as a possible running mate, he said, "It is an honor to be mentioned. We need a new Contract with America to outline a 100-day plan to take back Washington from the lobbyists, bureaucrats, unions, and leftists. After helping in 1980 with Reagan and 1995 as speaker I know we have to move boldly and decisively before the election results wear off and the establishment starts fighting us. That is my focus." Meanwhile, Trump told CNN he'd be "interested in vetting" John Kasich as well.

House Dems Push on Puerto Rico, Citing Zika
16 hours ago

"House Democrats are stepping up pressure on Republicans to advance legislation addressing Puerto Rico’s worsening debt crisis by issuing a report arguing that austerity cuts can’t be sustained and have made the island more vulnerable to the mosquito-borne Zika virus." Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee released a report yesterday that argued "further sharp reductions in government spending can’t be a part of a legislative solution"—especially with a rainy season boosting the mosquito population and stressing an island health system already struggling to deal with the Zika virus.