Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Basically, for two reasons:
1. The Democrats want a shutdown. They expect the Republicans to get most of the blame, enabling President Obama to look sweetly reasonable and entirely moderate by contrast.
2. The GOP leadership will prove unable to talk sense to the 87 freshmen Republicans in the House and their supporters in the Tea Party. The House freshmen, encouraged--I might almost have said egged on--by certain members of the Senate, including Rand Paul, will insist on bigger cuts than the White House and Senate can accept.
Ergo, a shutdown--and the Democrats are right. Republicans will take most of the blame. As Newt Gingrich learned in 1995, when you're up against the President of the United States and the mainstream press, you lose.
And all this is so completely and utterly needless. Republicans are winning. They need to keep locking in actual gains, not make a grand and glorious but losing stand. As Fred Barnes argues in this morning's Wall Street Journal:
What's unsatisfying to many conservatives is most likely the best Republicans can achieve in 2011. "Public opinion seems to support Republican efforts to cut spending without shutting down the government," notes Keith Hennessey, former domestic policy adviser to President George W. Bush, and some recent polls back him up. Mr. Hennessey supports a gradualist strategy. "Don't change tactics," he says. "Just ratchet up your demands a little."
That makes sense. What doesn't is sacrificing spending cuts you can get on the altar of those you can't.
Republicans face a single imperative--just one exigency--and it isn't cutting the budget this year. It's defeating President Obama next year. Only then--only with a Republican in the White House--can truly deep budget cuts begin. Insisting, as Rand Paul has done, on cutting $500 billion right now? Refusing, as Marco Rubio has done, to vote on any more continuing resolutions, even if they include modest but genuine cuts? Sheer self-indulgence.
Talk me out of it if you can. Persuade me that a government shutdown next month would be good for the country, or for the GOP, or for the Tea Party, or for anyone at all. But until you do, I have to tell you, I feel as though I'm watching one of those controlled, slow-motion car crashes. Only instead of a dummy, inside there are 87 GOP House freshmen who have no idea--no idea at all--what's about to happen to them.
- Comment (85)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Nov '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
What do we fear in a government shut down? As I understand things, a shut down is no shut down that I would recognize in the private sector where words have actual meaning.
Dec '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
That's also my understanding of a government "shutdown." So much has been categorized as essential since 1995 that most of the federal government will continue to chug along.
Dec '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Why, Peter? You appear to already shouldered the guilt. You seem willing to maintain the status quo (and to continue baseline spending) just so it won't seem like you're associated with the group you perceive to be the losers, before the fight has even been joined.
Instead, why don't you tell me why continuing this spending spree won't hurt my children, or my children's children, or me for that matter as I near retirement. Or, in light of the obvious fact that continuing spending at current levels will hurt my kids, explain to me how it'll only be a temporary thing, despite the profligate history of both parties while in power.
If Republicans can't defund NPR, can't defund Planned Parenthood, and can't defund Obamacare while they have the support of the tea parties, why should I believe that Republicans will reduce spending later?
A sure reason for Republicans to be blamed for a government shutdown, particularly when spending has so recently been given a huge shot of steroids and really must be curtailed, is Republicans hanging heads and acting guilty.
Get hold of yourself, man!
Jun '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
It seems to me Peter, that there is an assumption that conditions today are the same as they were in 1995. One has to ask whether the mainstream press, by which I think you mean "media" has the clout that it had in '95. Since 1995 the Internet has become the main news source for Americans. Since 1995 social media has proven to be a very effective tool to create and activate grassroots organizations - the Tea Party. In 1995, FoxNews did not even exist. FoxNews dominates the news cycle.
And whether Republicans as a whole will get the blame for not reining in their stubborn Tea Party-backed brethren may not play out either because squishier Republicans can claim plausible deniability..."Look, we tried getting them in line."
If there is a shut down the Tea Party will get the bulk of the blame...and I think the Tea Party would be happy to take it and engage in the propaganda war.
Feb '11
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Excellent post, Peter. And as you quote, Fred Barnes makes a terrific argument in the WSJ piece. Particularly here:
Jun '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
I think it would be great for some government workers, the so-called "non-essential" segment, to feel what it's like to have their job shut down. Millions of private sector Americans know already. The only difference is, government workers end up getting reimbursed after the shutdown is over. The Democrats (and some Republicans) need a kick in the pants, to start facing reality. It's worth a try. One day, our lenders will be the ones shutting us down. That'll be REAL hard to fix with one vote.
Sep '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
You mean the Republicans will take the credit for Government shutdown? Right?
Jun '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Lauren Fink, Ed.: Excellent post, Peter. And as you quote, Fred Barnes makes a terrific argument in the WSJ piece. Particularly here:
Mar 28 at 9:38am
Sorry, but $61 Billion is a gnat's sneeze given the size of the federal debt. To suggest that these baby steps somehow prevent the country from falling into the abyss is ludicrous. Let's not forget that some states are on the verge of fiscal collapse and we are in denial about the possibility of runaway inflation fueled in part by gas prices that could go well north of $5 a gallon. Unless, of course, the strategy is to place Hoovervilles on the Mall and in Lafayette Park and line up for bread and soup.
Feb '11
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Just to keep in mind -- and perhaps you don't include military in "some" -- but we're one of many Marine families who won't get a paycheck if the government shuts down. Marines here at Quantico have been briefed on the possibility, and advised to try and budget accordingly. It's a scary thought.
Nov '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Peter,
It appears that the ricochet community is more radical conservative than you might have expected. I expect that the same is occurring in the general population.
The Wisconsin radical left was flummoxed. They couldn't believe that they had come up against a bunch of Republicans who would not cave in at the first sign of descent.
Seriously, what would happen if there were a shutdown? Would we even notice?
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
In substantive terms, Robert, there's nothing to fear. As Haley Barbour likes to say, "You'd be surprised by how much government you'd never miss." But the politics of a shutdown could prove bad--very bad. Obama would present himself as the calm moderate, performing the same act that got him elected in the first place, while presenting Republicans as extremists. Note--and this matters--that the Democrats have already targeted 14 GOP freshmen in the House, already beginning to run ads in the hope of unseating them. Republicans have been playing offense. A shutdown could force them onto their heels, requiring them to play defense. Not good.
Dec '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
This reminds me of the debate over the 2010 Delaware election, that pitted an establishment candidate who was a shoo in, vs. a tea-party candidate who was a long shot.
The former would be some what a "business as usual" kind of politician, and the latter being a "damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead", "take no prisoners" sort of politician.
In other words, we have two lines of thought. One of slow incremental, calculated "lets do the best we have with what we have, and strike when the moment is opportune" crowd, and we have the "stand our ground and never compromise principles" crowd.
I'm not sure where exactly I stand. I share Peter's concerns, yet I sympathize with people who are just fed up with business as usual--although, to be fair, in this case, business is much better than usual.
It's easy to see how a government shutdown could be turned on the Republicans, but, as others have pointed out in this post, today is not necessarily 1995. The mood of the country is different. Perhaps the country will see the Republicans sticking to their guns as a sign of strength?
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Who made any such suggestion? Not Fred Barnes. And not me. What Barnes does assert is that for the first time in decades the budget is being cut. Surrender this progress? For what? For cuts we can never ever get while the Democrats control both the White House and the Senate? What sense can that possibly make?
Jun '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
I'm of two minds on this one.
I agree with Peter, if the Republicans sit passively by assuming that the rest of the country agrees with them, in which case they'll be steamrollered by the left (and will lose a lot of independents).
But if the Republicans will be aggressive in getting the message out that this happened because the Dems couldn't even agree to even one-bazzilionth of a percentage decrease in spending, we can win the battle for hearts and minds.
Passivity means we lose. This is a battle over principle and a battle over who can get the message out most clearly.
Oct '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
I don’t see the Republicans communicating and teaching the American people WHY we need to cut spending significantly more than the Democrats or the President are willing to do. Just as in 1994 after the significant victory, the Washington Republican leadership and charismatic new members have stopped “campaigning” for their beliefs and have become defensive. I completely agree with your thesis, Peter. They definitely have not laid the ground work necessary for realizing political gains of a government shutdown.
Dear Washington party hacks: take a look at the work that Chris Christie and Mitch Daniels have performed in their states communicating constantly with their constituents. You have not yet earned the Tea Party support.
Sep '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
How much credibility are the Republicans willing to sacrifice by running scared of the Democrat spin on this? They will suffer either way.
As to those military families missing a paycheck. Sorry, I've been missing quite a few paychecks myself. You at least will get your back pay. No one ever promised working for the government entitled you to a steady paycheck, although that was certainly implied in the deal, no doubt. Anyone who votes on the basis that some party delayed a paycheck in trying to achieve some larger goal deserves the government they vote for.
Jan '11
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Brit Hume made an excellent point on the Sunday Fox show. He said (I'm paraphrasing) that the 2012 election will be about Obama, and he's likely to lose. The only hope for the Democrats is to make the election about anything other than Obama. So, the GOP smart strategy is to give a plausible alternative. The last thing the GOP should do is give anyone any reason to vote against them, because if they just stay calm, the election will come to them.
I agree with Peter. Unless we win 2012, the best we can do is small-here and small-there. To get to the real thing, we need to win 2012.
This is like a football game when one team is pulling away. That's when the coach calls a timeout, and tells his team to keep their head. If they spit at you, hold you, call you names, insult your sister ... be prepared and keep your head. Don't take the bait. Play with discipline.
Feb '11
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
I don't understand how the Republicans are risking sacrificing their credibility when they have been delivering on real spending cuts. Certainly these cuts aren't big enough, but the fact is that the Republicans don't have control of the government - they share control with a party that takes the exact opposite approach to addressing the country's problems. They can't will their policy into existence; either they have to persuade their current opposition (which the current strategy is doing, albeit at a snail's pace) or they need to wait until the next election when the people can finally decide on the matter. Forcing a standoff now invites confrontation when we don't yet have the strength to follow through. Until the people either affirm the Republican message in the next election (or repudiate it, God forbid) then a shutdown just provides an opening for the Democrats to mount a counteroffensive and slip back into the familiar old stereotypes, i.e. draconian Republican zealots vs. moderate and sensible democrats.
Jun '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
Peter Robinson
Who made any such suggestion? Not Fred Barnes. And not me. What Barnes does assert is that for the first time in decades the budget is being cut. Surrender this progress? For what? For cuts we can never ever get while the Democrats control both the White House and the Senate? What sense can that possibly make? · Mar 28 at 10:00am
Mr. Barnes: "In the meantime, the incremental strategy is working."
If the government becomes insolvent or if hyper-inflation ensues then "is working" or "progress" doesn't mean much, does it? The odds of Obama retaining the White House are higher than losing it and even higher if he shows that he's been willing to give on the budget. Republicans would have to have substantial gains in Congress to override a veto. Is that likely if voters perceive Obama as being fiscally pragmatic? Really? On the contrary, Obama's willingness to make little snips here and there enhances his stature and virtually ensures his re-election. So, the current cuts if accepted by Obama help rather than hurt him...so for Obama the current meager budget cutting program is working...in his favor.
May '10
Re: Why We're Headed for a Government Shutdown
The unserious side of my brain wants to respond by saying that we only lose if we shut down the Federal Gov't and then, at some point, start it up again.