Biden the Adult in the Room
There's been a load of compromising.
Two similar takes in the aftermath of the debt ceiling negotiations.
POLITICO (“Just don’t boast: How Biden world sought to ace the debt ceiling standoff“):
In the days after striking a deal with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to raise the nation’s debt ceiling, White House officials sought to downplay what they privately considered to be a substantial victory.
Aides feared that any crowing about the agreement would endanger its passage. They advised allies to be restrained, fearful of driving up Republican opposition.
But there was another consideration at play. Biden world wanted to emerge from the process with the public perception of being the “adults in the room;” mediators in an era of sharp partisanship. Getting lawmakers to collectively step back from the financial cliff was as big a victory as any specific provision from the debt ceiling package. And it would serve as a blueprint for the reelection campaign to come.
With the debt ceiling bill having passed the House on Wednesday, and soon to pass the Senate, the president’s team is aiming to use the negotiations around it to its political advantage, according to more than a half dozen people familiar with the plan but not authorized to discuss internal strategy. Biden’s advisers are betting that voters will reward him for getting a big thing done in a bipartisan fashion. They plan to portray the president as a steady hand in stark contrast to the extremes of the Republican Party.
The strategy has risks: Biden has rankled some progressives — over some of the compromises he made with McCarthy — who have warned that it could impact enthusiasm among voters next year. His above-the-fray approach also largely ceded the messaging space to the GOP, worrying some Democrats that they lost an important political cudgel.
But those close to his reelection bid believe that the president’s poise will stand in sharp relief to the overheated political brinkmanship put forth by Republicans, especially by Biden’s most likely 2024 opponent, Donald Trump.
“There are some MAGA Republicans in the House who know the damage that it would do to the economy,” said Biden recently when asked whether he would shoulder any blame if that nation defaulted, underscoring his argument that politics was being placed ahead of patriotism. “And because I am president, and presidents are responsible for everything, Biden would take the blame. And that’s the one way to make sure Biden is not reelected.”
Biden has long prized bipartisanship, warmly recalling his decades in the Senate when reaching across the aisle happened with more regularity than it does today. In his first two years, he was able to shepherd some bipartisan legislation through — including a massive infrastructure bill as well as a more modest gun safety package — although he relied on only Democrats for Covid funding and his signature Inflation Reduction Act and used executive action for items like student debt relief. But now, with Republicans narrowly in control of the House, Biden has no choice but to work with the opposing party on legislative matters, including on warding off a catastrophic default.
WaPo’s David Ignatius (“Biden is delivering on his most far-fetched pledge: Compromise“) is less cynical:
President Biden this week accomplished what America elected him to do — govern from the center and make deals that solve problems. Progressive Democrats don’t seem to like that cooperative spirit, which is a big reason their candidates keep failing to become president.
“The agreement represents a compromise, which means not everyone gets what they want. That’s the responsibility of governing,” Biden said last weekend in announcing the deal to raise the debt ceiling. It’s a defining Biden line.
The president’s congenital centrism is easy to criticize, especially in this era of hard, polarizing views. He’s a conciliator, a dealmaker who likes to say yes and has trouble saying no. He’s also risk-averse, and he avoids escalation when facing potential catastrophe, whether it’s war with Russia or a budget default.
But Biden’s critics miss the glaringly obvious fact that he is behaving precisely as he said he would. His inaugural address was a pledge to restore normal order. “I know speaking of unity can sound to some like a foolish fantasy,” he said, but still, “we can join forces, stop the shouting, and lower the temperature.”
Join forces with Republicans? Was Biden nuts? Yet gradually over the past two years, dodging brickbats from the left wing of his party, he has done it. First with a bipartisan infrastructure bill, then with a modest gun-control measure, then with the bipartisan Chips Act, and finally with the budget agreement. As Biden said on Wednesday, when the House passed the deal, “I have been clear that the only path forward is a bipartisan compromise that can earn the support of both parties.”
The most damning criticism of Biden’s budget agreement is that he capitulated to Republican hostage-takers threatening to destroy the nation’s financial health if they didn’t get their way. Progressives wanted the president instead to roll the dice on the untested legal theory that 14th Amendment — which states that “the validity of the public debt … shall not be questioned” — renders the debt limit unconstitutional.
The deeper point is that the budget agreement wasn’t capitulation but compromise. Biden got the essence of what he wanted, which was an extension of the debt limit without savage cuts to domestic spending. As for the GOP hostage-takers, it’s true (and outrageous) that they were holding a gun to the nation’s head. But as the FBI will tell you, in a hostage situation, someone needs to negotiate with the crazies — and keep talking until they agree to put down the gun.
What I like best about this deal is that it begins to reestablish a broad bipartisan political center. In the House vote, the agreement was backed by 165 Democrats and 149 Republicans, for a total of about two-thirds of the chamber. The rejectionists included 46 Democrats and 71 Republicans, and a Post analysis showed that they skewed toward the more liberal and more conservative members of each party.
Honestly, I just think this is who Biden is. Yes, it’s how he positioned himself during the 2020 primaries and general election and I’m sure his team thinks it’s the right posture for 2024. But he’s spent most of his adult life in the Senate and deal-making is just the name of the game.
While not everyone agrees that Biden trounced McCarthy and company in the negotiations (Kevin Drum, for example, thinks the latter pretty much got what they came for) I’m not sure that’s even how Biden thinks about these things. He needed to get a deal done to avoid default, gave as little ground as he thought he could in order to achieve that end, and got the deal done.
A political master class. Got almost everything he wanted, got an overwhelming bipartisan vote, managed the messaging well, maintained discipline. A pity he’s too old to do any of the things he just did.
Kevin is looking at Social Security and Medicare.
That’s what he and his masters want to cut, if not eliminate.
Another W for the senile old man. And yes, Biden’s instinct is to negotiate in good faith, it’s what he’s done all his political life.
I’m wondering whether at any point the craziness on the right will burn itself out and they will stop electing (or encouraging) people who are, frankly, either mentally ill (narcissists) or waving bloody flags in attempts to grift money.
Too many politicians on the right are threatening to blow up one or more of our economic and social systems unless they get what they want.
Upvotes are back! Thank you, James.
It’s long been a rule in business that you can accomplish anything if you don’t take credit for it. Biden knows that rule.
Now if I can figure out how to not go to moderation. Mu said something yesterday about logging in. I replied to ask how to log in. I don’t see any Log In or Account button or such. But my question stayed in moderation too late for anyone to see it.
@gVOR08: I had disabled that plugin because it seemed to be the one interfering with the comment editing plugin. I have disabled a couple of backward-facing plugins and re-enabled that one and, so far, the edit button seems to work. We’ll see if it’s a fluke.
@grumpy realist:
“I’m wondering whether at any point the craziness on the right will burn itself out and they will stop electing (or encouraging) people who are, frankly, either mentally ill (narcissists) or waving bloody flags in attempts to grift money.
Too many politicians on the right are threatening to blow up one or more of our economic and social systems unless they get what they want.”
The problem is that until they actually do blow things up, no one on the right sees making these threats as a bad thing. Until reality actually kicks them in the teeth, they have no reason to stop doing this.
@Moosebreath: This is all pluto-populism. This craziness has worked for the Billionaire Boys Club, allowing them to win enough elections to sometimes control government, federal and state, and always enough to prevent Ds from doing much. They’ll stop doing it only if it stops working.
The constitutionality of the debt limit needs to be clarified in the next two years. I agree you can’t risk it when we are about to default, but that’s why the case needs to be brought before it’s a crisis. Not sure who would have standing to do so, but it’s a fact that the left is correct it needs to happen, while Ignatius is right it can’t be risked when the hostage takers already have the gun out and are about to fire.
@gVOR08:
Mu said something yesterday about logging in. I replied to ask how to log in. I don’t see any Log In or Account button or such. But my question stayed in moderation too late for anyone to see it.
Sorry. I missed that reply (I generally sign off at 16:00 CDT). The moderators haven’t enabled the link in the header, but you can go directly to the login page:
https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/login
@Michael Reynolds:
Too old, and far too senile.
“When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”
— Maya Angelou
@Just Another Ex-Republican: It would with your current Supreme Court strike me as playing Don Quixote to seek a constitutional opinion on the subject. Notably when other paths present as simple legislation to repeal (and use whatever mechanism legislation affords to make it a hurdle to reinstate). Perhaps crossing laws prohibiting putting current engagement at risk as well as repeal of the limiting legislation.
@Just Another Ex-Republican: It would with your current Supreme Court strike me as playing Don Quixote to seek a constitutional opinion on the subject. Notably when other paths present as simple legislation to repeal (and use whatever mechanism legislation affords to make it a hurdle to reinstate). Perhaps crossing laws prohibiting putting current engagement at risk as well as repeal of the limiting legislation.
@Lounsbury:
Not a viable option as long as the filibuster remains and the pro-debt limiters have 41 votes in the Senate. So while it may be simpler, it is not in play for the foreseeable future.
@Lounsbury: Just want to note that if “simple legislation to repeal” were as easy as you imagine…
But it is typical of Righties to insist that the only way to resolve certain kinds of problems is to hold our breath until they’re ready to act legislatively. The fact that the various radical solutions suggested are quixotic at best only reinforces the futility of expecting Righties to govern.
@Michael Reynolds:
Now, now, let’s not jump to conclusions.
It’s entirely possible that McCarthy is a complete failure who cannot negotiate any substantial win, even against a feeble, senile old man.
Political master class, or incompetent opponent? Hard to tell from the outside.
@grumpy realist:
At the point where Americans stop looking for excuses to vote Republican, an extremist, anti-American, and proto-fascist party that has lost the plot, is out to lunch, and is unfit to govern.
@just nutha: The word easy was not used in my comment, and the phrase “simple” has the meaning of basic. Simple meaning focused.
Your impoverished reading skills aside, the comment was focused on practicality of achievement rather than playing as you lot so love to do (as like impeachments for showing your moral posture) Don Quixote and play for grand moral gestures with the current Supreme Court you have. This hardly if you read for understanding being a statement based on sympathy to said Court.
Of course if the Democrats have so little comptence in electoral poltics and legislation they perhaps deserve their current situation, but Mr Biden rather suggests there are indeed competent Democrats on hand to save the situation.
@MarkedMan: A very fair point but then it very much merits abolishing the filibuster for this – such carve outs have I believe precedent. Such paths rather seem more plausible than finding at once the basis for a Constitutional challenge and then rolling the dice on said challenge with the current Supreme Court which I personally would not desire to gamble on giving a result desired.
@Gustopher: I would submit that Mr McCarthy’s performance in getting the required law through the House indicates he is not in fact entirely incompetent. Burdened with lunatics and clowns in his own party, but not entirely incompetent or he would have failed on this.
The track record rather says Mr Biden is really quite good at his job, quite good indeed on playing hands that are not in his favour as such and could easily be badly played.
It seems to me Biden is a very effective operator, given the constraints he has to work with in herding the cats in Congress.
And not fighting the Supremes head on, see above re. Congress, plus even FDR had problems with getting that done.
He seems to me, from the outside, to have got a lot of substantial achievements, re. CO2 reduction combined with counterbalances to potential downsides for US industry, infrastructure repair, industrial reconstruction, support for Ukraine, union rights etc.
If he had Congress he might have made progress re. gun control, health care etc etc
But if wishes were horse, beggars would ride.
Given what constraints he has to work with, I’d argue he’s pushing Truman and Johnson for legislative and executive effectiveness.
(Massive caveat re. LBJ on Vietnam aside)
Whereas Carter was unlucky, Kennedy even more so, and both Clinton and Obama, for all their good points, were a bit lacking in conniving skills when it came to getting around obstructiveness.
@Lounsbury: So your comment was simply bloviation about hypotheticals that are unlikely in the real world? My mistake. Carry on.
@Gustopher:
Not mutually exclusive.
What I regard as Biden’s victory in this debt limit fight, is it got extended to 2025. This takes this particular brand of hostage taking out of the 2024 election campaign.
@JohnSF: Indeed his parliamentary and legislative process skills in the face of his situation are truly impressive. An executive achieving things with a compliant legislature is one thing.
Achieving as he has in the face of broad legislative obstruction from an opposition dominated by irrational reaction, quite another.
I don’t know in USA land they can ever in current living persons lifetime make any progress with their 2nd Amendement syndrome, and would not expect Mr Biden would be able to progress even with a majority, but in other areas, yes.
@MarkedMan: @Lounsbury: As I felt that I should check this memory, indeed in respect to Filibuster the carve out démarche is at le, I reference this ‘fact checking’ from 2020
The political plausibility of a filibuster carve out narrowly aimed from this context from the context of carve outs cited, notably in respect to issues focused on ensuring budgetary operations and respect of already issued budgetary laws. The operational wisdom of such a carve out is quite another matter as the sword cuts both ways – and whatever a legislature passes, it can of course revert…
Nevertheless, I think Mr Biden shows the Democrats are not the helpless incompetents, victims of the evil Republicans, and while the crazy factions of the Republicans do rather love these efforts for their drama, the establishment clearly does not (and of course for those with real ‘Wall Street’ connexions, no one very much loved the sudden having to think of buying interim default protection on US Treasury, but significant buying did occur on worry that the crazy factions were out of control). As Biden achieved this recent extension and masterfully given the hand in hand, I would say to say it is not out of reach although clearly not “easy”
@Just nutha ignint cracker: Well, if you consider the Democrats so deeply incompetent as to be unable to navigate the basics of legislation , despite Mr Biden’s recent performance, or if your inability to think outside of the latest progressive faction political sloganeering-as-magical-solution then of course your impoverished reading would be that.
Of course achievement of legislation to this effect is vastly more plausible than the achievement of the magical solution right now so adored by the Bobo Intello Left of getting the law declared unconstitutional, because you so adore simple magic want via your Supreme Court solution sloganeering, quite ignoring both issues of achieving standing and then of the getting a non-political decision out of said current Court despite their demonstrable pattern of ideological decisions against established precedent…. why yes, that is ever so more pratical than the boring tedium of actual legislative process. It lacks of course the great moral virtue signalling vigour of say engaging in doomed impeachments bound to fail, to prove as Bobo Intellos pointless intellectual points.