Whose debt ceiling? Not the administration's!
I haven鈥檛 weighed in on this for a few days as I thought it made more sense to watch things develop. But nothing much appears to have changed, even as we get closer to the deadline.
Still, my theory of the case remains this: it all comes down to a number game, and I don鈥檛 mean dollars, I mean votes.
Boehner and of late, even McConnell, while seemingly immovable on revenues, do not want to be responsible for a default that could take a frail economy back into recession. But their control over their caucus in the House is tenuous. Their intractability is at least in part, posturing to a) get a better deal (more cuts, less revenues), and b) appease the zealots.
The question is, how many House R鈥檚 can they drag along at the end of the day to support a deal that will have at least some revenues. Team Obama/Biden, to their credit, have never wavered on this and that matters too, vote-wise. They can鈥檛 get their caucus behind them without revs in the deal, because, as the President pointed out yesterday, no revs would mean putting everything on the spending side of the ledger, and that would do far more harm than good, both to the economy and to the people in it.
I believe the administration can get the D鈥檚 behind a package that raises the ceiling and reduces the deficit somewhere between $1 and $2 trillion, includes something in the $500 billion range on revenues, takes on some sacred cows (entitlements), hopefully less on the benefits side than on the costs savings side.
It remains an open question whether Boehner can deliver on some version of the above, but man, he and his team are making it hard to stay calm.
Apparently, yesterday they introduced a new and particularly outlandish theme. From this AM鈥檚 WaPo:
鈥淏oehner suggested that the only concession Obama should expect from Republicans is a vote to allow the Treasury to continue borrowing.
鈥樷�淢ost Americans would say that a 鈥榖alanced鈥� approach is a simple one: The administration gets its debt-limit increase, and the American people get their spending cuts and their reforms.鈥濃��
That is SO not the definition of negotiation.
I hate to go to the 鈥渁ll caps鈥� place, but they leave me no choice.
IT IS NOT THE ADMINISTRATION鈥橲 DEBT LIMIT INCREASE鈥T鈥橲 AMERICA鈥橲 DEBT LIMIT INCREASE.
Mr. Boehner, you鈥檝e already accepted a budget鈥攖he budget that鈥檚 currently in place running the gov鈥檛鈥攖hat depends on raising the debt ceiling. You then voted for another budget鈥攖he Ryan budget鈥攖hat also on raising the debt ceiling by trillions. And by dint of your position, you, among others, are responsible for the economic damage that failing to raise the ceiling will cause.
I鈥檝e already explained my position on from the table, but to take this position is to metaphorically walk away from the table.
One can only hope this is more posturing for leverage, but as the graph shows, it鈥檚 getting close to freak-out time.
(Note: got to give it up to a WaPo copyeditor who, riffing off of Obama鈥檚 exhorting the R鈥檚 to come to the table and 鈥渆at your peas,鈥� said that it鈥檚 time to 鈥済ive peas a chance.鈥�
--------------------------
海角大神 has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.
