GOP ratchets up debt ceiling demands
Congressional Republicans have not only rejected a new White House offer to essentially freeze domestic spending at FY2023 levels, they’re now demanding work requirements for SNAP recipients that are more rigid than those they originally proposed. They’re also insisting on adding new immigration provisions from the GOP’s recently passed border bill — which, mind you, Republicans didn’t include in their own debt ceiling bill. (More on both in a second … )
The GOP’s dug-in position comes at the end of a week when both President JOE BIDEN and Speaker KEVIN McCARTHY acknowledged that a budget deal would have to be bipartisan. Vote-counters on the Hill believe that any eventual deal will need the backing of about 100 House Democrats since a number of conservatives will never support a compromise. Yet given what Republican negotiators are now countering, they’re far from that number.
The White House is not happy with the new GOP demands. This morning, Biden told reporters that the GOP needs to move off their “extreme positions.”
Jennifer Rubin/Washington Post:
Biden uses good cop, bad cop against the GOP’s debt ceiling extortion
Some Democrats would prefer to ignore Republicans entirely, doing away with the perennial hostage-taking and encouraging Biden to exercise his presidential power to deny Republicans any advantage. That, however, includes significant risks, including the loss of support among the usual suspects, notably Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.). White House aides point out that a legal challenge over the 14th Amendment would be inevitable, and while the legal battle played out, the markets would be in turmoil. Indeed, the White House detected some troubling movement in the bond markets recently, though that calmed down once reports of constructive negotiations emerged.
The true test will come if and when a default deal materializes. If Biden avoids making cuts, essentially agreeing to a continuing resolution for the remainder of his term with some window dressing (e.g., coronavirus funds claw back) but no implementation of counterproductive work requirements for benefit programs, it would amount to a huge win for the president and for Democrats. A bipartisan deal that leaves his agenda in place and puts to bed the default issue for the remainder of his term would give him the best outcome, given that Republicans do, after all, control the House.
A reminder of how much media is addicted to horse race. The story is who the GOP electorate is, not who the candidates are.
EJ Dionne/Washington Post:
The poor are being held hostage in the debt ceiling standoff
Here’s what must not happen: Our country’s least advantaged citizens should not be forced to pay the largest price to prevent an economic catastrophe. Making the poor poorer should never happen; it certainly shouldn’t happen on a Democratic president’s watch.
That issue is at the heart of this needless and destructive battle. House Republicans decided to hold the economy hostage to slash assistance for low-income Americans while protecting tax cuts for the wealthy.
That’s a factual statement, not a partisan complaint.
With Tim Scott and Ron DeSantis announcing, can 61% of Chris Sununu and 100% of Chris Christie be far behind? It’s a chance for anti-Trump attacks to get tested and maybe carry over to the general.
Hey, you never know. Trump might be indicted or something.
Will Bunch/Philadelphia Inquirer:
Why was this massive Trump scandal hiding in plain sight for 28 months?
A shocking allegation that then-President Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani was selling pardons for $2 million got lost. Why it matters now.
To the very end, Trump ignored the practices of past presidents — who’d worked mostly off petitions that had been investigated by the Justice Department’s Office of the Pardon Attorney — and granted clemency largely for connected folks that he tended to know, from close cronies like Roger Stone and Steve Bannon to his reality-TV pal Rod Blagojevich, the disgraced Illinois governor, to his son-in-law’s dad, Charles Kushner. Then there was an additional category: those who’d paid good money to Trump World insiders to plead their case.
On Jan. 17, 2021, the New York Times published an article headlined: “Prospect of Pardons in Final Days Fuels Market to Buy Access to Trump.” Based on more than three dozen interviews with key players, the Times confirmed that wealthy convicted felons were paying tens of thousands of dollars to insiders like a former Trump personal attorney, John Dowd, in the rush to gain clemency. To be clear, hiring a lawyer promising special access — while perhaps unseemly — is not new and probably not unlawful. But a Times passage about convicted ex-CIA leaker John Kiriakou, who paid an unnamed Trump associate $50,000 with a contingent promise of $50,000 more if a pardon was granted, included a jaw-dropping if unproven allegation:
“And Mr. Kiriakou was separately told that Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani could help him secure a pardon for $2 million. Mr. Kiriakou rejected the offer, but an associate, fearing that Mr. Giuliani was illegally selling pardons, alerted the F.B.I. Mr. Giuliani challenged this characterization.”
Susan Stubson (Wyoming Republican)/ New York Times:
What Christian Nationalism Has Done to My State and My Faith Is a Sin
I first saw it while working the rope line at a monster-truck rally during the 2016 campaign by my husband, Tim, for Wyoming’s lone congressional seat. As Tim and I and our boys made our way down the line, shaking hands and passing out campaign material, a burly man wearing a “God bless America” T-shirt and a cross around his neck said something like, “He’s got my vote if he keeps those [epithet] out of office,” using a racial slur. What followed was an uncomfortable master class in racism and xenophobia as the man decanted the reasons our country is going down the tubes. God bless America.
I now understand the ugliness I heard was part of a current of Christian nationalism fomenting beneath the surface. It had been there all the time. The rope line rant was a mission statement for the disaffected, the overlooked, the frightened. It was also an expression of solidarity with a candidate like Donald Trump who gave a name to a perceived enemy: people who do not look like us or share our beliefs. Immigrants are taking our guns. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. You are not safe in your home. Religious freedom is on the gallows. Vote for me.
The messages worked. And in large part, it’s my faith community — white, rural and conservative — that got them there. I am a white conservative woman in rural America. Raised Catholic, I found that my faith deepened after I married and joined an evangelical church.
Russia is, apparently, still listening.
Jamelle Bouie/New York Times:
There Is a Reason Ron DeSantis Wants History Told a Certain Way
As it happens, I’m reading the historian Donald Yacovone’s most recent book, “Teaching White Supremacy: America’s Democratic Ordeal and the Forging of Our National Identity,” on the relationship between history education and the construction of white supremacist ideologies in the 19th and 20th centuries. It’s an interesting book, filled with compelling information about the racism that has shaped the teaching of American history. But I mention it here because, in one section on Southern textbook writers and the demand for pro-slavery pedagogy, Yacovone relays a voice that might sound awfully familiar to modern ears.
As Yacovone explains, pre-Civil War textbook production was dominated by writers from New England. Some Southerners had, by the 1850s, become “increasingly frustrated with the ‘Yankee-centric’ quality of the historical narratives.” They wanted texts “specifically designed for Southern students and readers.” In particular, Southern critics wanted textbooks that gave what they considered a fair and favorable view to the “subject of the weightiest import to us of the South … I mean the institution of Negro slavery,” as one critic put it.
Greg Dworkin
Source link
