A 'CLUELESS' CAPITOL — It's happened to Republicans and Democrats alike: a seemingly smooth legislative train that goes off the rails. Remember Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) holding up a bipartisan defense policy bill in late 2020? Sen. Jim Risch (R-Idaho)delaying a 2018 funding bill out of distaste for a home-state park named after a political rival? Or — just Wednesday — an internal House Democratic revolt delaying a $1.5 trillion spending bill by 10 hours. These moments don't reflect well on the party in power. It's arguable they could prove an electoral liability, too, by giving political opponents more fodder to argue that voting for the other guy would smooth out the kinks of the Hill's sausage-making. Not to mention that a Republican Congress, in this case, might prove a valuable check on unified Democratic control. But as shaky as the current government funding deal's path to passage is so far, the cash will ultimately get approved. Possibly as soon as tonight, if Rand's shrug today is any guide. Congress' most conspicuous stumbles matter most when the desired outcome never occurs, not when it's delayed or snarled — no matter how embarrassing the faceplants look in the short term. Government shutdowns might seem like exceptions to the legislative delays-don't-matter theory. After all, they hold up workers' paychecks as well as potentially vital assistance to many Americans. Also, Washington lore holds that they've been ruinous to the prospects of the Republicans who've pursued them. Even then, though, shutdowns haven't been fatal to the political prospects of the party that drove them. Let's take the shutdowns that are etched in our collective memory: 1995's three-week standoff between then-President Bill Clinton and then-Speaker Newt Gingrich and the 2013 shutdown then-freshman Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) sparked in a bid to stop Obamacare funding. In the 1996 election, after the Gingrich-driven shutdown, Republicans held onto both chambers of Congress even as Clinton was elected to a second term as president. In the 2014 election, after the Cruz-driven shutdown, the GOP picked up 13 House seats and took back control of the Senate. Now, that's not proof that grabbing control of a legislative train and slamming on the brakes is good politics. House Democrats were already facing a serious challenge this fall staving off a GOP wave, and their last-minute excision of $15 billion in Covid aid from the current spending bill due to intra-party disagreements this week isn't going to make their midterm problem go away. But it's not going to make it worse, either. What looks terrible from close up may blur in the long view. Call it the Monet theory of news cycles, for those of you who recall another 1995 milestone (the movie "Clueless"). What moves congressional elections, particularly in midterm years, is often surprisingly disconnected from the nuts-and-bolts of legislation. While funding the government and getting $14 billion in aid to Ukraine is dominating the Capitol this week, it's the jump in inflation that's likelier to be on voters' minds in November. Members of both parties are lining up to decry rising consumer costs, and to debate whether the Russian president or the American one is to blame — but there's little movement on concrete proposals that would alleviate inflation's sting. The Democrats talking loudest about taking up specific opportunities to cut inflation, as POLITICO reported this week,are vulnerable incumbents worried about losing their seats. That's yet another sign that even as spectacularly cockeyed planning on a spending bill grabs headlines, voters' economic pain will be what matters in November. Welcome to POLITICO Nightly. Reach out with news, tips and ideas at nightly@politico.com. Or contact tonight's author at eschor@politico.com , or on Twitter at @eschor.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment