Congress’s Fiscal Fiasco Forces Americans to Wear Badge of Shame

Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, meets with reporters, discussing immigration, student loans, and Obamacare, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, July 11, 2013. The GOP leadership rejected the immigration bill passed by the Democratic-controlled Senate. Boehner said House committees will continue their work on a step-by-step approach to immigration reform, calling the current laws a broken system. 
National Journal
Add to Briefcase
Norm Ornstein
Sept. 18, 2013, 3:30 p.m.

As read­ers of my past columns know, I was not ex­actly op­tim­ist­ic as we ap­proached crunch time over the debt lim­it in 2011. But I am far more pess­im­ist­ic now. At a din­ner I at­ten­ded Monday night with a host of those in­di­vidu­als deeply in­volved in fisc­al mat­ters, it be­came clear that there are no talks go­ing on now — neither form­al nor back chan­nel — to avoid a series of crises over spend­ing and the debt ceil­ing. The House ma­jor­ity is in pro­found dis­ar­ray, un­able to muster ma­jor­it­ies for any­thing on the spend­ing front as the new fisc­al year ap­proaches.

In a mis­guided at­tempt to mol­li­fy his rad­ic­als and avoid a gov­ern­ment shut­down over the de­mand to abort Obama­care, House Speak­er John Boehner has in­stead turned the fo­cus to the debt ceil­ing. His earli­er as­sur­ance that he and his party would not play games with the na­tion’s full faith and cred­it turned in­to a pledge weeks ago in­to to in­voke the “Boehner Rule,” in­sist­ing that the debt lim­it be raised only by an amount equal to ad­di­tion­al new spend­ing cuts — mean­ing tril­lions of ad­di­tion­al dol­lars piled on to the $2.5 tril­lion in cuts already made (but of course with no spe­cif­ics about what he would want to cut). And it is clear that a slew of Re­pub­lic­ans in­side Con­gress, bolstered by forces out­side like Her­it­age Ac­tion, will push their cru­sade to crush Obama­care by hold­ing the debt-ceil­ing host­age.

In 2011, when the in­tens­ive ne­go­ti­ations between Boehner and Pres­id­ent Obama broke down, Sen­ate Minor­ity Lead­er Mitch Mc­Con­nell stepped in at the el­ev­enth hour to fill the va­cu­um and avert a de­fault. When Boehner de­clared that he would not par­ti­cip­ate in any ne­go­ti­ations over the fisc­al cliff, Mc­Con­nell stepped in with Vice Pres­id­ent Joe Biden to fill the va­cu­um. This time? There will be no Mc­Con­nell; the minor­ity lead­er is so cowed by the chal­lenge to his re­nom­in­a­tion from the right that he will not be a party to any “com­prom­ise.” And the in­form­al ne­go­ti­ations between Obama, his Chief of Staff Denis Mc­Donough, and a group of Re­pub­lic­an sen­at­ors led by Bob Cork­er have broken down, at least for now.

At this point, I will be sur­prised if we do not have at least one par­tial gov­ern­ment shut­down with­in the next month or two, and I fear there is a high chance of a real breach in the debt ceil­ing, one that may not last for a long time, as­sum­ing that the mar­kets re­act vi­ol­ently to something they still be­lieve will not really hap­pen, and that voters re­act to the no­tion that the U.S. will pay its cred­it­ors in China be­fore it pays its troops in Afgh­anistan. But a de­fault this time will have dev­ast­at­ing con­sequences, mean­ing a down­grade in our cred­it by all rat­ings agen­cies and a spec­tacle to the world of spec­tac­u­lar, self-de­struct­ive dys­func­tion.

I could go on, but I want to fo­cus in­stead on the dam­age already oc­cur­ring from the 2011 deal, via the se­quester. The mind­less, across-the-board budget cuts in do­mest­ic and de­fense dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing were openly and de­lib­er­ately de­signed not to oc­cur — the idea was to spur the “su­per­com­mit­tee” cre­ated by the deal to do a broad­er fisc­al bar­gain, along the lines of the Simpson-Bowles pro­pos­al, to avoid se­quester cata­strophe. But the “no-taxes” pledge killed the chance for that broad­er deal. We have had one year of the se­quester, and are ap­proach­ing the second tranche. The dam­age to the coun­try and the fab­ric of gov­ernance was not im­me­di­ately ap­par­ent — this was not like the roof of the Amer­ic­an house on fire, but more like a par­tic­u­larly po­tent group of ter­mites eat­ing out the found­a­tion. But its im­pact is be­com­ing more ap­par­ent and more alarm­ing.

This Au­gust, I went with my fam­ily to Gla­ci­er Na­tion­al Park, a place of awe­some beauty, which re­minded me again that our na­tion­al parks are a crown jew­el of our won­der­ful coun­try, and that our park rangers are them­selves won­der­ful monu­ments to pub­lic ser­vice. But I could see small signs of the de­teri­or­a­tion caused by the budget cuts — fa­cil­it­ies closed or cur­tailed, main­ten­ance de­ferred. In sev­er­al parks, such as Yel­low­stone, private con­tri­bu­tions kept the worst dis­rup­tions from oc­cur­ring, but that will not hap­pen when the second wave of cuts take ef­fect. Roughly 279 mil­lion people vis­ited na­tion­al parks in 2011; the parks are more than nice places to vis­it, be­cause they gen­er­ate huge amounts of eco­nom­ic activ­ity and jobs in the areas around them. Hun­dreds of mil­lions of dol­lars in cuts will jeop­ard­ize bil­lions of dol­lars in eco­nom­ic activ­ity.

Then there is the FBI, which faces staff re­duc­tions of 3,000 and two-week fur­loughs without pay for 36,000 agents and their sup­port teams. As a con­sequence of stu­pid and de­struct­ive se­quester cuts, the FBI, ac­cord­ing to former Dir­ect­or Robert Mueller, is go­ing to have to move re­sources away from vi­ol­ent crime and white-col­lar busi­ness fraud to cov­er the more-press­ing con­cerns of cy­ber­se­cur­ity and na­tion­al se­cur­ity. Great tradeoff, isn’t it?

Now con­sider the Na­tion­al In­sti­tutes of Health. Fran­cis Collins, the re­mark­able sci­ent­ist head­ing up the agency, has said that the se­quester is dev­ast­at­ing med­ic­al re­search: 650 grants that have been rated in the top 17 per­cent by peers in terms of po­ten­tial for suc­cess will not be fun­ded this year, along with a num­ber of oth­ers that have been fun­ded for years but can­not be re­newed be­cause of the cuts. No one can tell which of these re­search pro­jects would have res­ul­ted in a med­ic­al or sci­entif­ic break­through — but the odds are over­whelm­ing that some of them would. For no good reas­on, we are sharply re­du­cing the chance of ex­tend­ing lives and al­le­vi­at­ing suf­fer­ing. In the mean­time, young sci­ent­ists are de­mor­al­ized. Some will leave the field, and oth­ers will ac­cept bet­ter op­por­tun­it­ies in China, Singa­pore, Aus­tralia, or oth­er coun­tries eager to fill the va­cu­um left by our mind­less policies.

A ra­tion­al polit­ic­al sys­tem would find a way to bring budget dis­cip­line without en­dan­ger­ing these areas, along with food safety, home­land se­cur­ity, na­tion­al de­fense, the air-traffic sys­tem, and on and on. In­stead we are ca­reen­ing to­ward eco­nom­ic dis­rup­tion triggered by out­rageous de­mands that jeop­ard­ize the eco­nomy and en­danger the most vul­ner­able among us. Shame­ful is the only way to de­scribe it.


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.