With the government shuttered and leaders nudging closer to the possibility of a default on the nation’s debt, lawmakers are recognizing the lessons of past fiscal fights. And one in particular — for better or worse — is rising above the others: Do not give in.
Congress flirted with fiscal ruin in 2011 before leaders agreed to the Budget Control Act and again on New Year’s Day this year, when they averted the so-called fiscal cliff. In the aftermath of each, each side had a pelt it could claim.
But now, leaders and rank-and-file members are dug in, with the path toward resolution murkier than ever.
The thinking among Senate Democrats is that they’d set a dangerous political precedent if they were to bend to House Republicans. From the Democratic viewpoint, Republicans are watching to see how this fight plays out. Any concessions they extract from Democrats will only give them incentives to do so again in the future.
“If we were to give in while the government is shut, what do you think happens on the debt ceiling? What do you think happens when the CR has to be renewed?” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., asked recently. “The hard Right says, see, by holding a gun to their heads, we got something we wanted. We’ll up the ante this time.”
But Republicans too have little reason to give in. Many conservatives ran on a platform dedicated in part to slashing Obamacare and claim a mandate to do just that. From their viewpoint, there’s little incentive to defy the constituents who sent them to Washington in the first place.
“If you were one of these House guys in 2010, you ran, you beat a Democrat incumbent and said, ‘I promise I’ll go to Washington and repeal Obamacare,’ ” said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. “You expect them to back off?”
Democrats admit that Republicans in the House won their election. To do otherwise, of course, would be to ignore reality. But they quickly point out that their reason for not giving in that they won an election of their own — the presidential election.
“One of the big changes is that they had just won a huge election,” Schumer said. “They lost a big election in 2012.”
It’s not just the election results, either, that explain the political brinkmanship. Republicans picked a fight over what is destined to become a key part of President Obama’s legacy.
“President Obama views Obamacare as perhaps the most signal achievement of his administration and so therefore he is much more committed on this issue than probably he would be on almost any other issue,” McCain said.
For lawmakers, the political fight in 2010 over Obamacare itself leaves bitter traces behind. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, remembers taking votes at 1 a.m. and 7 a.m. without the chance to offer amendments, and today’s battle feels familiar.
“It is extremely gridlocked now. This is certainly one of the worst times,” Collins said. “But in terms of the impact on the country, this is far worse. Far worse.”
Asked what lessons he’s learned from the 2011 and 2012 fiscal fights, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., took the opportunity to throw a political stone.
“It takes leadership to end [these fights],” Levin said. “Speaker Boehner is not a strong leader, to put it mildly.”
Levin, who’s retiring after 34 years in the Senate, said what he’s seeing in the current fight is unprecedented.
“I’ve never seen an inability of a leader, ultimately, to do what he thinks is the right thing to do, even though 5 or 10 percent of his caucus doesn’t,” Levin said. “I’ve never seen this.”
Opinions like Levin’s have been the norm with lawmakers, albeit with almost a mirror image coming from many Republicans.
Asked whether the lesson that all lawmakers had learned was really just that winning is the most important goal, Collins shook her head.
“That’s what I’m trying to get away from,” she said. “For us just to make partisan speeches on the Senate floor, blasting one another, doesn’t do it.”
- 1 A Look at Late-Term Abortion Restrictions, State by State
- 2 Why Four Justices Were Against the Supreme Court’s Huge Gay-Marriage Decision
- 3 In South Carolina, The Establishment Fights Back
- 4 The Pen, Phone, and Stray Voltage
- 5 John Kasich Dismisses Climate Change As ‘Some Theory That’s Not Proven’
What We're Following See More »
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 NewYorker.com, 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.”
“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.