The GOP’s Reckless Bet

House Republicans playing games with the debt limit risk doing serious damage to their party — and the country.

Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, and the House GOP leadership respond to President Barack Obama's remarks to the nation's governors earlier today about how to fend off the impending automatic budget cuts, at the Capitol in Washington, Monday, Feb. 25, 2013. From left are Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas, Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., partially blocked is Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Kan., House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-NC, and Rep. James Lankford, R-Okla. 
AP Photos2013
Charlie Cook
Sept. 19, 2013, 4:05 p.m.

Listen­ing to Treas­ury Sec­ret­ary Jac­ob Lew speak to the Eco­nom­ic Club of Wash­ing­ton on Sept. 17 brought to mind how little many of the more con­ser­vat­ive Re­pub­lic­ans in the House really know about Pres­id­ent Re­agan’s eight years in of­fice, how he op­er­ated, and, for that mat­ter, why and how he suc­ceeded. In oth­er words, few of them get how the town worked dur­ing Re­agan’s ten­ure, as op­posed to today, when it only barely does.

In his speech and sub­sequent dis­cus­sion with Dav­id Ruben­stein — the pres­id­ent of the Eco­nom­ic Club and the cofounder and cochief ex­ec­ut­ive of­ficer of the Carlyle Group, a glob­al private-equity firm — Lew poin­ted out that if the “Hastert Rule” had been ob­served when Demo­crats con­trolled the House dur­ing the Re­agan ad­min­is­tra­tion, much of the le­gis­la­tion that Re­agan is re­membered for would not have passed. (Un­der the Hastert Rule, named for former House Speak­er Den­nis Hastert, a Re­pub­lic­an, the ma­jor­ity party in the House does not act on bills un­less the meas­ures have the sup­port of a ma­jor­ity of the ma­jor­ity party’s mem­bers.)

There were plenty of Re­agan-backed meas­ures that Speak­ers Tip O’Neill and Jim Wright op­posed, but these House lead­ers did not stand in the way of their be­ing taken up for con­sid­er­a­tion. Take, for ex­ample, the Bal­anced Budget and Emer­gency De­fi­cit Con­trol Act of 1985, bet­ter known as the Gramm-Rud­man-Hollings law, and the Om­ni­bus Re­con­cili­ation Act of 1981, also known as the Gramm-Latta Act, which in­cluded the Kemp-Roth tax cuts. Both of these meas­ures reached the floor and passed the House without a ma­jor­ity of the cham­ber’s ma­jor­ity, the Demo­crats. Is a rule that would have ef­fect­ively pre­cluded the pas­sage of le­gis­la­tion that con­ser­vat­ives cite as pil­lars of Re­agan’s do­mest­ic agenda really something they want to sup­port?

The fact is, only 33 mem­bers of the 433 cur­rent mem­bers of the House (two seats are va­cant) served for as much as a day while Re­agan was pres­id­ent between 1981 and 1989. Of these mem­bers, only 14 are Re­pub­lic­ans. And only 25 mem­bers, in­clud­ing 12 Re­pub­lic­ans, served a full ses­sion of Con­gress while Re­agan was in of­fice. To put it dif­fer­ently, any mem­ber who came to the House after Reps. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, and Fred Up­ton, R-Mich., did not serve a full Con­gress with Re­agan.

Those who pay lip ser­vice to Re­agan without really un­der­stand­ing what happened dur­ing those years should read Chris Mat­thews’s book, Tip and the Gip­per: When Polit­ics Worked, com­ing out Oct. 1. While most con­ser­vat­ives prob­ably find the lib­er­al Mat­thews a bit dif­fi­cult to take on his Hard­ball show on MS­N­BC, when he is writ­ing his­tory, he does so very ob­ject­ively. (His 1996 book, Kennedy and Nix­on: The Rivalry That Shaped Post­war Amer­ica, was fas­cin­at­ing and could not have been fairer to both men.)

It’s clear that per­haps 50 to 100 House Re­pub­lic­ans see Pres­id­ent Obama and Demo­crats as in­her­ently wrong, al­most evil; and thus they view com­prom­ising as es­sen­tially be­com­ing cocon­spir­at­ors with evil. Giv­ing in, even just a little bit, is plain wrong, this think­ing goes. While this point of view is fine for the cof­fee shop or Rotary Club back home, it is ana­thema to the le­gis­lat­ive pro­cess, where com­prom­ise is es­sen­tial to mak­ing gov­ern­ment work. Com­prom­ise is part of demo­cracy.

On some is­sues, dig­ging in your heels doesn’t cause a lot of harm, but on oth­ers, it is down­right dan­ger­ous. Lew cited former Re­agan Treas­ury Sec­ret­ary James Baker III as say­ing, “A fail­ure to pay what is already due will cause cer­tain and ser­i­ous harm to our cred­it, fin­an­cial mar­kets, and our cit­izens,” not­ing that Re­agan raised the debt lim­it 17 times dur­ing his eight years in of­fice. No one would ques­tion Re­agan’s con­ser­vat­ive cre­den­tials, but he knew the dif­fer­ence between rhet­or­ic and real­ity, between what you would like to see and what can hap­pen in a demo­cracy, where com­prom­ise is an es­sen­tial in­gredi­ent.

So that leads us to the situ­ation we are in today, with House Re­pub­lic­ans threat­en­ing to shut down the gov­ern­ment on Oct. 1 and re­fus­ing to raise the debt lim­it later in the fall if Obama and the Demo­crats don’t agree to scale back the 2010 health care re­form law — a meas­ure that has sur­vived a Su­preme Court chal­lenge and mul­tiple at­tempts by con­gres­sion­al Re­pub­lic­ans to re­peal it. Mind­ful of the dam­age that past budget con­front­a­tions have done to the Re­pub­lic­an Party, House GOP lead­ers would like to avoid a gov­ern­ment shut­down or a de­fault, but the zeal­ous mem­bers of their caucus are push­ing them in­to a more con­front­a­tion­al pos­ture.

Re­pub­lic­ans eager for a fight need to real­ize that some things are not to be trifled with. A na­tion that does not pay its bills and fails to meet its ob­lig­a­tions for spend­ing is hardly fol­low­ing a con­ser­vat­ive ap­proach to fisc­al policy.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4454) }}

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×