With only 13 days left to prevent Following a government shutdown, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Kevin McCarthy faces his biggest test yet.
Washington’s dominant narrative is that his back is against a wall, with conservatives threatening a shutdown and promising to remove him as chairman if he does not respond to their demands. If the federal bureaucracy grinds to a halt, some say, that could be a good thing — sparking necessary conversations about spending.
Why we wrote this
With government funding set to expire on September 30, national deficits are worse than they have been in decades. Republicans are internally divided over whether to make a deal or take a stand.
This financial year alone, the government is $1.5 trillion in the red, causing debt to rise to a record $33 trillion.
Lost amid the frantic bickering is the fact that this impasse is a political choice. When Mr. McCarthy faced a similar crisis last spring over whether to raise the debt ceiling, he cut a deal with Mr. Biden and Democrats that ultimately saw the measure pass with a huge bipartisan majority.
Rep. Dean Phillips, a Minnesota Democrat in the Problem Solvers Caucus, says there are more than enough Democrats willing to help save Mr. McCarthy’s speakership if he is willing to save the United States from a shutdown.
“There is a tremendous opportunity here,” says Mr Phillips.
But Chairman McCarthy, knowing the political costs of such a move, has indicated he is unwilling to explore a bipartisan deal — at least not yet.
With just thirteen days to avoid a government shutdown, Speaker Kevin McCarthy faces his biggest test yet. His challenge: trying to unite the divided Republicans in the House of Representatives on a spending deal, with only a four-vote margin and seemingly irreconcilable divisions between what right-wing Republicans are demanding and what can ultimately be passed by the Senate.
McCarthy allies worked Monday to shore up support for a 30-day stopgap measure. But its future was highly uncertain, as numerous members of his own party had already spoken out against the deal.
The dominant narrative in Washington is that Speaker McCarthy’s back is against a wall, with conservative members of the Freedom Caucus threatening – or even pushing for – a shutdown and promising to try to remove him as speaker if he doesn’t respond to their demands agrees. They view the federal bureaucracy as bloated, ineffective and driven by a progressive policy agenda. If the government comes to a standstill, that’s not a bad thing in their view, especially if it forces difficult conversations about spending. This fiscal year alone, the government has spent more than $1.5 trillion more than it raised, pushing the debt to a record $33 trillion.
Why we wrote this
With government funding set to expire on September 30, national deficits are worse than they have been in decades. Republicans are internally divided over whether to make a deal or take a stand.
Mr. McCarthy’s announcement last week of an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden over whether he corruptly participated in his son Hunter’s foreign business dealings was widely seen as an attempt to appease right-wing parties. But they say impeachment is an entirely different matter.
Lost amid the frantic bickering is the fact that this impasse is a political choice. While this may be the least damaging option for Mr. McCarthy at this point, there are other options he could pursue.
When Mr. McCarthy faced a similar crisis last spring over whether to raise the debt ceiling, he ultimately struck a deal with Mr. Biden and Democrats that ultimately saw the measure pass with a huge bipartisan majority. That cost him politically, but not as much as a national bankruptcy would probably have cost.
A government shutdown, however, is seen as a lower-stakes event — and perhaps even a good thing in the eyes of some Republicans. (Many, but by no means all, federal operations would effectively close until a new financing deal is reached in Congress. There would be no default on the national debt.)
Centrist Democrats see an opportunity for a new bipartisan deal between Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Speaker McCarthy, who a good working relationship.
“I believe Hakeem Jeffries is willing to do everything reasonably possible and work with members on both sides of the aisle to prevent a shutdown,” said Rep. Dean Phillips of Minnesota, a Democratic member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus.
He argues that there are significantly more “principled, reasonable Democrats” than the members of the Freedom Caucus who are blocking a deal and threatening to remove Mr. McCarthy as chairman. “We would be there to protect his seat if he does what is right, not for his party but for the country.”
But Chairman McCarthy, knowing the political costs of such a move, has indicated he is unwilling to explore a bipartisan deal — at least not yet.
And he may not turn to Democrats even in the event of a shutdown, having already experienced the wrath of conservatives in the aftermath of the debt ceiling negotiations, in which they felt he gave up too much ground and backed down the promises he had made. in exchange for their support in January’s speaker elections.
After Mr. McCarthy secured the bipartisan deal to avert national bankruptcy this spring, Freedom Caucus members led a weeklong blockade of bills advancing to the House of Representatives. That standoff ended with an agreement to cut spending by $130 billion more than the debt ceiling agreed. They have also pushed through a series of votes on far-right issues important to the Republican base. In July they were talking about a government shutdown.
Even if Mr. McCarthy succeeds in getting his party to pass the current stopgap measure, the anti-“woke” provisions and 8% cuts to virtually everything but defense have virtually no chance of passing the Democratic-controlled Senate.
Many have characterized the high-stakes drama as an embarrassing mess. But Florida Rep. Byron Donalds, a member of the Freedom Caucus involved in drafting the emergency measure, said tense negotiations are not always a bad thing.
“It’s actually very enlightening,” he told reporters last Thursday.
Rep. Donalds, a member of the Financial Services Committee, says border security is one of his hard lines. “Our government must secure its borders. Period, period,” he said, as news broke last week that the federal government — overwhelmed by the sheer number of immigrants crossing the border illegally — allowed thousands of people to take to the streets in southern cities and towns. “That is the job of the federal government. If not, why are you financing it?”
It’s not just members of the Freedom Caucus who are tough on spending.
As she walks back to her office after a vote, Rep. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming says that “the vast majority of Republicans feel like there’s way too much power stored in this city and we’re spending way too much money.” The federal government, she adds, “shouldn’t be the answer to all our problems.”
The impasse is fair the latest evidence that the budget process is essentially broken in a polarized, closely divided Congress.
The way budget negotiations should work is through parallel subcommittees in the House of Representatives and the Senate 12 credit accounts to cover all areas of the federal government, from agriculture to transportation. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to get these bills approved by both chambers.
So Congress ultimately resorted to emergency measures known as “continuing resolutions” or “CRs,” which temporarily fund the government at the same level as the previous fiscal year, to give leadership time to finalize the larger budget deal to establish.
In the current impasse, Freedom Caucus members have opposed any CR that does not adjust spending levels at all, as the previous budget was passed along party lines and reflects a host of Democratic priorities.
In recent years, Congress has often failed to complete the regular appropriations process, even with a CR, and leadership has combined all twelve bills into one “omnibus,” requiring members to vote up or down on the entire package – often with very few resources. time to see what’s inside.
One of the original demands that conservative Republicans made of Mr. McCarthy during the battle for speaker was to go back to 12 appropriations bills, to provide more opportunities for input on spending levels in every part of the federal government.
But the only appropriations bill even close to completion right now is the Defense Act — and last week, Mr. McCarthy unexpectedly had to postpone a vote on it because he didn’t have enough support from the Republican Party.
Rep. Phillips, the centrist Democrat from Minnesota, says he doesn’t envy Chairman McCarthy’s position. Still, he adds that it is the duty of leaders to “appeal to those they know need them. And many of us are waiting for that call – right now. Straight away,” he says. “There’s a big opportunity here.”