Ghosts of Fiscal Fights Past Say Don’t Surrender

WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 02: Senate Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) addresses the media after voting on the debt limit bill on August 2, 2011 in Washington, DC. The Senate voted 74-26 to approve the bill to raise the debt ceiling, allowing the U.S. to avoid default on its debts.
National Journal
Michael Catalin
Add to Briefcase
Michael Catalin
Oct. 6, 2013, 7:37 a.m.

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.”

What We're Following See More »
Bill Murray Crashes White House Briefing Room
3 minutes ago
CFPB Decision May Reverberate to Other Agencies
2 hours ago

"A federal appeals court's decision that declared the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau an arm of the White House relies on a novel interpretation of the constitution's separation of powers clause that could have broader effects on how other regulators" like the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

Morning Consult Poll: Clinton Decisively Won Debate
2 hours ago

"According to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll, the first national post-debate survey, 43 percent of registered voters said the Democratic candidate won, compared with 26 percent who opted for the Republican Party’s standard bearer. Her 6-point lead over Trump among likely voters is unchanged from our previous survey: Clinton still leads Trump 42 percent to 36 percent in the race for the White House, with Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson taking 9 percent of the vote."

Twitter Bots Dominated First Debate
4 hours ago

Twitter bots, "automated social media accounts that interact with other users," accounted for a large part of the online discussion during the first presidential debate. Bots made up 22 percent of conversation about Hillary Clinton on the social media platform, and a whopping one third of Twitter conversation about Donald Trump.

Center for Public Integrity to Spin Off Journalism Arm
4 hours ago

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, the nonprofit that published the Panama Papers earlier this year, is being spun off from its parent organization, the Center for Public Integrity. According to a statement, "CPI’s Board of Directors has decided that enabling the ICIJ to chart its own course will help both journalistic teams build on the massive impact they have had as one organization."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.