Politico’s David Rogers updates on the collapsing GOP debt-ceiling front lines:
Washington’s political mood darkened dramatically Tuesday, as the debt ceiling crisis showed signs of spinning out of control and Republicans began looking for an escape path from the default showdown they helped create…
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) set the day’s tone early with a blast aimed at the president but implicitly undercutting House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s efforts to craft a $2 trillion deficit-reduction package with the administration. This followed Cantor’s role in pulling back Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) from pursuing a still larger, $4 trillion, 10-year deal with Obama. And McConnell in turn got his own thumping from House Republicans who quickly dissed his suggested backup plan that would allow the debt ceiling to increase this month, subject only to a resolution of disapproval from Congress.
“As long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable,” McConnell said grimly…”We’re certainly not going to send a signal to the markets and to the American people that default is an option,” McConnell told reporters. “What we’re not going to be a party to in the Senate, I’m pretty confident, is default.” [Pols emphasis]
…Under the plan, Congress would authorize upward of $2.5 trillion in new borrowing authority for the Treasury that would become available in three increments: $700 billion this month, $900 billion more in the fall and a final $900 billion next summer. Obama would be required in each case to list corresponding savings, but under the new rules of the road, Congress could only stop each increase by adopting a veto-proof resolution of disapproval.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s proposal would give the GOP a few speechification opportunities, but essentially would end the debt-ceiling “crisis”–and the mere proposing of it severely weakens the hard-line position(s) of House Republicans, themselves breaking down in intraparty confusion and rivalry between Eric Cantor and John Boehner. Apropos, KCNC News4 interviewed freshman Rep. Cory Gardner yesterday afternoon on the debt-ceiling negotiations, where he was loaded up…with the previous day’s talking points?
Republican Rep. Cory Gardner talked with CBS4 about what he thought about the negotiations. He said he thinks lawmakers and the president will meet the Aug. 2 deadline. [Pols emphasis]
“We will continue to meet our obligations, but we’re going to do it by cutting spending, by eliminating this credit card debt we’re in, make sure we’re not raising taxes,” Gardner said.
The President says both sides need to make sacrifices. Gardner talked about some of the things Republicans might be willing to give up.
“I think anytime you’re asking the American people to increase spending by trillions and trillions of dollars, that’s a sacrifice because they know they’re going to be paying for that down the road,” Gardner said…
Of course, in another Politico story today, Gardner is substantially less hopeful:
Ultimately, many House Republicans who have called for spending cuts to exceed any increase in the debt limit understand that $2.4 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years doesn’t outweigh $2.4 trillion in increased borrowing authority over the next 18 months or so.
Rep. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) said even the high estimate of $2.1 trillion identified by the vice president’s panel “won’t do it for a lot of people” by itself.
It’s possible that resolution of this debate will occur quite close to the August 2nd deadline set by the Department of the Treasury to extend borrowing authority. Until that time, bit players like Rep. Gardner will be forced to read from a rapidly-changing script, which really sucks for him politically. But the latest developments suggest that every Republican position is fatally weak, and the “Tea Party” is not going to get anything close to satisfaction. Polling clearly shows Americans prioritize saving Medicare and Social Security over deficit reduction. This could be a moment you’ve been waiting for for two years: when the “Tea Party” faces the stark reality of an unworkable extreme agenda, with no more fudge factor, and they simply lose.
With that in mind, the president should be able to give up much less than he had reportedly offered to Speaker Boehner in the failed “Grand Bargain” negotiations, while whatever political advantage the GOP entered this fight with has already been squandered. It isn’t winning them any political support they don’t already have, and it’s costing them a lot more.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Colorado Pols is 20 Years Old!!!
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: davebarnes
IN: Holy Crap Boebert Bestie Matt Gaetz’s Ethics Report Is Bad
BY: MarsBird
IN: It’s Long Past Time to Ban Body Armor
BY: Ben Folds5
IN: Holy Crap Boebert Bestie Matt Gaetz’s Ethics Report Is Bad
BY: The realist
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: coloradosane
IN: Holy Crap Boebert Bestie Matt Gaetz’s Ethics Report Is Bad
BY: coloradosane
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: MartinMark
IN: Monday Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
being on my blackberry, but please reread the Gardner quote that begins with “I think anytime . . .”
Let’s see then, the ultimate sacrifice according to this numbskull would not be give up any tax cuts or closing a single tax loophole, but instead some more Bushian level deficit spending? WTF?
I think Cory should be prohibited form ever uttering a sentence containing the words “I think,” clearly he doesn’t, he can’t, he won’t, or some combination thereof.
Might I remind you that this is all happening as a result of the worst electoral defeat for Democrats since 1948. Unless it is the opinion of Democrats that voters are mindless and led around by the media’s whim, that still means something.
You’re fools to think that Obama’s willingness to even discuss entitlement reform with Boehner is not a result of rising conservatism. This is all happening on our terms, not yours.
I appreciate you laying out the daily DNC talking points so I can deconstruct them however. How do I get on that mailing list?
Still never having offered any concrete evidence for your last several comments, eh ArapG? Don’t ever respond to facts offered by your opponents. Just spew the next talking point. Do you understand what discussion means?
Where were during all the deficit budgets of the Bush era (s)?
Like a monkey at the zoo, flinging poo.
has a snowball’s chance in hell against Obama, you’re dreaming. The same is true if you think forcing a government default is going to go any better for the Republicans than shutting down the government did in the 90s.
But, ArapaGop does not understand that we do NOT have a parlimentary form of government. In other words, the 2010 election did NOT overturn the 2008 election. Obama was elected for four years by a majority of his fellow citizens.
His responsibility is to govern from that mandate.
It is a mess.
It happens a lot, you know.
The Democrats lost the 2010 election because the public didn’t believe Presieendt Obama was focused on jobs and the economy and instead spent too much time on other issues, primarily the healthcare legislation.
The Republicans were hired on in November 2010, at least in the House, to get the government refocused on jobs and the economy. Instead they immediately announced their two top priorities were insuring the President isn’t reelected and repealing the healthcare legislation. I note they probably did this because they don’t believe the government should take any action, including in terms of the economy and jobs, except take cuts. The Republicans really don’t have any policy options to offer except destruciton of our government.
We have endured a very difficult time since 2008 and the last thing the public is interested in is putting what economnic security they have at risk, as Rep. Kantor clearly does, by risking a government default. Kantor and his ilk represent the very worst in our political system. He and the others look at a square peg 10′ by 10′ and the 1/16″ diameter hole and because ideology says the peg goes through the hole then that is what is going to happen because ideology is never wrong and must be followed without deviation regardless of the fact (and reality) the square peg obviously won’t go through the hole. They act like the old cavalry soldiers at the beinning of World War I who led their brigades into battle against machine guns and were slaughtered but old outdated military doctine said it would work. Rep. Kantor and those who stand with him, including our own Rep. Cory Gardner, would rather see our fragile economy destroyed than solve the problem because ironclad ideology dictates their position.
A line from David Halberstam book on Vietnam comes to mind this morning:
Ideology and philosophy are only the beginning of policy analysis, not the end. The specific facts and the realization that one does not hold all the political cards (the U.S. Senate) demand compromise and a workable solution. The Republicans, with Kantor in the lead, are heading for the cliff. If they go over it, we will find their political corpses at the bottom of the canyon as well an elephant’s.
and nice reference of WWI Cavalry soldiers.
Ideology and politics above all and to hell with the rest is the order of the day. Tar and feather Mitch McConnell for his brief bout with sanity !
…I know they think otherwise, but Sen McConnell is a member of the MINORITY Party in the Senate. Y’know, the one that’s been a collection of swivel-mounted dickheads about appointments, treaties, and other legislative actions.
Despite his high opinion of himself, Sen REID will be the one controlling with bills are introduced onto the floor of the Senate. What makes Sen McConnell think this bill has a chance in HELL of advancing before the Dem Bill?
It’s checkmate, folks, honest. Hooting about the position of the pieces won’t change that….
with Rs, especially in the House where they have the majority.
This is going to sound weird, but one of the things that insurgencies fail to do is plan for victory.
Hard line ideologically inflexible positions run up against the reality of governing.
At camp david in 2000 when ehud barak offered Arafat a pretty good deal, Arafat couldn’t move to a negotiating stance from an insurgent’s all or nothing stance. Part of this was because he had never prepared his supporters that compromise was necessary and partially because he had never been faced with the realities of governing.
I am not saying that the tea party is a terrorist movement, but I will contend that its ideological framework makes it essentially unworkable as a negotiating partner or a governing entity. The mainline GOP will find its captivity to its insurgency increasingly problematic as the plutocrats find a home supporting Democratic candidates.
Trust me I am not gloating–I’m not sure I want them.
Is that the financial interests who truly control the GOP told them they don’t get to fuck around any more and they must increase the limit before Aug 2. And so now they have to do whatever works to get it passed.
And as others have pointed out – they have not prepared their worker bees in Congress for this shift. Problem…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…
The Constitution says that Congress appropriates money by passing legislation that the President can sign or veto, with the option of Congress overriding vetoes.
This McConnell plan gives some of Congress’ power on money to the President, and reverses the veto process–or gives something similar to Congress over power they gave away to the President. Or something. Certainly not the process proscribed by the Constitution.
So where is the outcry of concern about the Constitution?
But authorizing the Treasury to borrow the money has been a separate deal since World War I, and super-majorities to over-ride a decision Congress has farmed out have also been around for a long time.
I’m concerned about McConnell’s testicles, which he appears to have placed into a blind trust, but not about the Constitution.
that had such a plan been proposed by the President or Democrats, Republicans would have claimed outrage that Obama was trying to claim unconstitutional powers. (Precedents? Inconsistency has never stopped them from such claims against Ds.) My concern is more for the hypocrisy than the Constitution.
As for McConnell’s testicles–blind trust? No, I think he is quite aware of who has possession of them.