I know it's been pointed out a million times but the party of small government and personal responsibility relentlessly going to bat for tax cheats is one of the most absurd things about our politics. If Republicans believed in anything they say they believe in then making people pay the taxes they actually owe would a huge priority. It's such a joke
It is worth noting that from McCarthy's POV he came in asking for swinging cuts and didn't get them. Despite Democratic weaknesses, he wasn't negotiating from a position of strength, because of the odds he will need Democratic votes to pass this thing.
Agree that Biden dismissing the 14th was a bad move, also Biden could have strengthened his hand IMO by doing some kabuki theatre around the coin, like leaking a purposed design for a 10 billion dollar coin etc.
On this final point: does Biden really *want* the climate activists to be loudly on his side during a re-election campaign? Or does he want to appear to be saying “look, I piss both sides off a little in order to find a happy medium”?
I think having hardcore support from activists on the right or left either one may be a net negative, for any sitting president who won’t face a legitimately threatening primary challenge.
Once the debt ceiling bill goes through, Democrats in the Senate should pass a "clean" bill that basically takes this kind of brinkmanship off the table.
Make the Republicans vote for debt ceiling nonsense itself, not for or against a specific deal.
>part of this deal is a modest trim to Democrats’ plans to fund the tax police
My biggest concern coming into these negotiations was that the Republicans would gut the IRS funding, so I really hope the trimming is truly modest.
There was quite a bit of additional spending on IRS operations (roughly 25 billion) that I think could see cuts without seriously hampering the agency. Cuts to enforcement would be galling (tax cheats are the absolute worst) and killing the business technology/customer service improvements (including potentially eliminating the "Direct e-file" task force that would provide an end run around Turbo Tax and HR Block) would be a massive disappointment from a good governance perspective.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what the details are
honestly if the only actual SNAP work requirement change is moving the existing work requirement age max from 49->54 then I dont think its the end of the world but at the same time it still feels dumb to give up anything there when the coin or fancy bonds exist
It is worth noting that Democrats jammed 2 years of discretionary spending growth into last year’s omnibus so the ‘give’ here on nominal spending is basically nil.
I am genuinely impressed with Biden’s ability to get bipartisan legislation passed with minimal drama.
Thus ends the latest episode in this long-running political show. It followed a similar arc to most others, with the political party that doesn't hold the Presidency winning some minor and transient policy points while a minority of the population worries needlessly. There will be another episode in 3-4 years.
I agree with all of Matt's points, except this one:
>The president could — and should! — have said that his preference was to avoid using those options because of his limited confidence in the courts and because the financial system doesn’t like wackiness<
No, negotiation 101 suggests that, if Biden were serious about using the threat of extra-constitutional options to strengthen his position, he needed to exhibit (head fake, that is) maximum confidence about the legality of these moves, and maximum determination/willingness to use them. Don't allow in even a scintilla of doubt that you're fully prepared to use a platinum coin, or a consol bond, or what have you.
Biden being very good on substance and pretty bad on public messaging is a common theme for his first 2 1/3 years. It seems mostly inherent to his skills, governing style, and, uh, energy levels, but I wonder how much of a pivot towards messaging he is able to do as election considerations start to heat up.
We all knew they should have raised the ceiling in the lake duck. There’s really no way to view this except that senior Dems and WH were wanting a bipartisan deal. So the ‘tactics’ of this are either worse or better than Matt describes depending on your view of the deal and politicians democratic responsibilities.
Matt knows the average slow boring subscriber has no Saturday night plans -- thanks Matt!
I know it's been pointed out a million times but the party of small government and personal responsibility relentlessly going to bat for tax cheats is one of the most absurd things about our politics. If Republicans believed in anything they say they believe in then making people pay the taxes they actually owe would a huge priority. It's such a joke
It is worth noting that from McCarthy's POV he came in asking for swinging cuts and didn't get them. Despite Democratic weaknesses, he wasn't negotiating from a position of strength, because of the odds he will need Democratic votes to pass this thing.
Agree that Biden dismissing the 14th was a bad move, also Biden could have strengthened his hand IMO by doing some kabuki theatre around the coin, like leaking a purposed design for a 10 billion dollar coin etc.
On this final point: does Biden really *want* the climate activists to be loudly on his side during a re-election campaign? Or does he want to appear to be saying “look, I piss both sides off a little in order to find a happy medium”?
I think having hardcore support from activists on the right or left either one may be a net negative, for any sitting president who won’t face a legitimately threatening primary challenge.
Dark Brandon wins again
“You offer to relinquish your planetary self-destruct bomb for 2 years, if I but… kick this puppy?”
[Dons shades. Kicks puppy to literal pieces]
Once the debt ceiling bill goes through, Democrats in the Senate should pass a "clean" bill that basically takes this kind of brinkmanship off the table.
Make the Republicans vote for debt ceiling nonsense itself, not for or against a specific deal.
>part of this deal is a modest trim to Democrats’ plans to fund the tax police
My biggest concern coming into these negotiations was that the Republicans would gut the IRS funding, so I really hope the trimming is truly modest.
There was quite a bit of additional spending on IRS operations (roughly 25 billion) that I think could see cuts without seriously hampering the agency. Cuts to enforcement would be galling (tax cheats are the absolute worst) and killing the business technology/customer service improvements (including potentially eliminating the "Direct e-file" task force that would provide an end run around Turbo Tax and HR Block) would be a massive disappointment from a good governance perspective.
I guess we'll have to wait and see what the details are
Pretty disappointing that Matt helped a neighbor on food stamps get cancer sticks through low level fraud.
A secret night time post?! What does this mean for the economy...
honestly if the only actual SNAP work requirement change is moving the existing work requirement age max from 49->54 then I dont think its the end of the world but at the same time it still feels dumb to give up anything there when the coin or fancy bonds exist
It is worth noting that Democrats jammed 2 years of discretionary spending growth into last year’s omnibus so the ‘give’ here on nominal spending is basically nil.
I am genuinely impressed with Biden’s ability to get bipartisan legislation passed with minimal drama.
Thus ends the latest episode in this long-running political show. It followed a similar arc to most others, with the political party that doesn't hold the Presidency winning some minor and transient policy points while a minority of the population worries needlessly. There will be another episode in 3-4 years.
I agree with all of Matt's points, except this one:
>The president could — and should! — have said that his preference was to avoid using those options because of his limited confidence in the courts and because the financial system doesn’t like wackiness<
No, negotiation 101 suggests that, if Biden were serious about using the threat of extra-constitutional options to strengthen his position, he needed to exhibit (head fake, that is) maximum confidence about the legality of these moves, and maximum determination/willingness to use them. Don't allow in even a scintilla of doubt that you're fully prepared to use a platinum coin, or a consol bond, or what have you.
Biden being very good on substance and pretty bad on public messaging is a common theme for his first 2 1/3 years. It seems mostly inherent to his skills, governing style, and, uh, energy levels, but I wonder how much of a pivot towards messaging he is able to do as election considerations start to heat up.
We all knew they should have raised the ceiling in the lake duck. There’s really no way to view this except that senior Dems and WH were wanting a bipartisan deal. So the ‘tactics’ of this are either worse or better than Matt describes depending on your view of the deal and politicians democratic responsibilities.