JONATHAN CHAIT MARCH 30, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
How should Republican leaders deal with the dilemma of being caught between a base that will view any budget deal with President Obama as a sellout and independent voters who are likely to turn on them if they shut down the government? Jonathan Bernstein thinks they should bite the bullet and cut the best deal they can, figuring they'll get hit by the base no matter what:
what Boehner has to do is to convince Republican Members of the House that the hit they’re going to take from the right for compromising is inevitable. They’ll be seen as sellouts if they cut a deal before a shutdown. They’ll be seen as sellouts if they cut a deal after a six week shutdown. True believers will always be convinced that complete and total victory was just a week away if only the cowardly politicians had been willing to hang in there. They can’t win that game.
Not a bad argument. The counter is that it's one thing to cut a deal with Obama, and another to be perceived as cutting that deal without really fighting. If Boehner shuts down the government and then cuts a deal, at least he's demonstrated some willingness to go to the mat and fight, right? Bernstein is right that he'll have angry Tea Partiers regardless, but I do think he needs to show that he's fought the good fight. A deal with Obama is bad no matter what, but a deal without a shutdown looks like surrendering the fort without firing a shot.
The other quibble I have with Bernstein's analysis is that I don't think he's really thinking about this the way Boehner is, or even should, be thinking about this. What is the downside to a shutdown? Republicans get less popular, have a lower chance to win the presidency in 2012, and maybe a higher chance of losing the House as well. What is the downside to cutting a deal? GOP backbenchers revolt against Boehner and depose him as Speaker of the House.
If I'm Boehner, I'm more worried about the guns pointed at my back then the guns pointed at my face. A shutdown increases the small chance that he goes from Speaker to Minority Leader in 2013, but a deal increases the chance that he goes from Speaker to (R-OH) in 2011. The right-wingers do not trust Boehner, and he has very little slack. He also lived through a series of purges and attempted purges in the late 1990s, always taking the form of purists complaining that the leadership had gone soft.
Boehner's top priority is probably staving off internal revolt. That means shutting down the government.
11 comments
Your logic is ironclad, Jonathan. I have been wondering how long Boner can hold on as Speaker. If he caves before showing resistance, he could indeed be out on his ear.
- liberalref
March 30, 2011 at 10:46am
Chait's reasoning is sound. I'm wondering how to square that reasoning, however, with the recent Washington Post article claiming that Boehner is actually reaching out to moderate House Dems in order to cut a deal without Tea Part support. If the article is true, than it suggests Boehner hasn't come to Chait's conclusion. If the article is based on a manipulative leak by dems or republican rivals, then it will still be interesting to see just how forceful Tea Party criticism is. I'm actually leaning towards manipulative leak, as it squares with Schumer's known talking point that democrats should play up the conflict between Boehner and Tea Party extremists, and the Post article does, in fact, help highlight the conflict between Boehner and the dems.
- sokol8
March 30, 2011 at 11:03am
The same argument holds for BHO as viewed by many Dems. He's already given away half the store as a pre-compromise. The Dems problem is that their base doesn't push back, so giving away most of the rest of the store is viewed as having little political consequence.
- drofnats1
March 30, 2011 at 11:25am
Good analysis, Jon. I heard this morning that House Republicans are STILL pushing for a "Compromise" that requries cuts of 61 billion dollars. Now, I understood their ORIGINAL demand was for cuts of 61 billion dollars. (And sure, they promised the Tea-Party 100 billion in cuts, so the Tea-Party will be unhappy regardless). And as far as I know, the two-week and three-week extensions were all made under the "compromise" of pursuing those final 61 billion dollars in cuts. So it sounds like Boehner's "compromise" is nothing but "do it our way" yet again. And if Obama folds, the resulting job losses will almost guarantee an Obama failure in 2012. So, there's consequences.
- AllanL5
March 30, 2011 at 11:39am
Yes, that's right. Boehner said he was worried about jobs. He just didn't whose job he was worried about.
- Nusholtz
March 30, 2011 at 12:13pm
say
- Nusholtz
March 30, 2011 at 12:23pm
Suicide - They're going to shut down the Government with the current crises and turmoil. If we survive a shutdown, it would backfire spectacularly. Let the Weeper of the House try. Loss of the House in 2012 would certainly give him something to cry about. BTW, is that Dick "to the victor go the spoils" Armey in the background? (photo does seem a little dated)
- dubyadoubte
March 30, 2011 at 12:40pm
The Dems don't have any backbone, and that's more a part of the problem: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_03/028686.php "In 1995, when the Gingrich-led Republicans confronted the Clinton White House, the president had a mantra he'd repeat endlessly -- it was called M2E2. Clinton would say he's prepared to negotiate with Republicans, but wasn't prepared to go along with deep cuts to "Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment," four popular measures voters didn't want to see slashed. In 2011, Dems never quite got around to picking their own M2E2. Criticisms of the GOP plan have been all over the map, made more complicated by the fact that Democrats themselves have been far too quick to buy into the dubious notion that Americans actually want a focus on the deficit instead of the economy. This debate quickly got away from Dems, but it didn't have to be this way. Republicans are winning, at least for now, with a very weak hand."
- wkwami
March 30, 2011 at 1:01pm
If Boehner can put forward a deal that has some Democratic support, then even if it fails and the government shuts down, he can avoid any negative consequences for himself (internal considerations) or for control of the House (external considerations). Neil
- purcellneil
March 30, 2011 at 1:14pm
Let's see: There are fabulous sources to consult on American politics like the political scientist, Jonathan Bernstein, who actually knows something, and then there is dro with his ideological fantasies. Hmm, I wonder whom it would be best to read?
- liberalref
March 30, 2011 at 9:59pm
sorry lib ref. Dro has consisently predicted rather accurately the problems with BHO's and the Dems approach for two years. Correlation is not causation-- but you ain't even got correlation.
- drofnats1
April 1, 2011 at 11:07am