Budget, part 2: Ready to deal?
Both sides bring specific, but not grandiose, goals to negotiations
WASHINGTON — The latest federal budget showdown has quickly set the stage for the next one, as Republicans and Democrats have just three months to craft a new agreement to avoid another shutdown crisis.
This time, though, the parties have serious incentives to reach a deal. Both want to make changes to mandatory budget cuts that kick in next year, slicing into Pentagon accounts that Republicans want to protect and domestic programs, such as Head Start early education classes, that Democrats favor.
But any deal crafted by the Dec. 13 deadline that Congress set is likely to be far more modest than the “grand bargain” once pursued by President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio.
Interest in a big fix for the nation’s budget has faded among Democrats because many no longer feel it is necessary or worth the political perils. The deficit has declined rapidly, and the national debt, now $16.7 trillion, is projected to be stable or even declining as a share of the economy well into the next decade.
For Republicans, the idea of cutting expensive programs for retirees draws support from many party leaders even as the GOPhas grown much more dependent on the votes of Americans older than 65 and on lower-income whites. Those groups want to preserve Social Security and Medicare.
Although the politics have shifted as the battered GOP struggles to regroup amid deep internal divisions, the nation’s budget problems remain difficult and economically daunting.
Yet neither party appears to have the political motivation to make far-reaching changes to tax policy and safety net spending that economists say is needed for long-term fiscal health.
Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the House Budget Committee chairman whose views on federal spending carry substantial weight with Republicans, has called for a more modest “down payment.”
His Democratic counterpart, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the seasoned Senate Budget Committee chairwoman, said, “We’re going to look at everything in front of us.”
Ryan, Murray and other members of a new joint House-Senate committee responsible for crafting a budget deal met for the first time last week — the day after the president signed the agreement that ended the recent standoff.
That episode shut down government for 16 days, threatened a default on the national debt and cost tens of billions of dollars. The deal reached by Democrats and Republicans funded the government through Jan. 15 and suspended the debt limit until Feb. 7. 123 4
56 7 8910 11
12 13 14 15 166 17 18
19 20 21 22 233 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
1 567 8
9 10 12 13 14 1515
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 262626 27 272727 28 282828 29 292929
303030 30 313 31
1 234 5
6 7 8 91011 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28
Feb. 7:
“Our goal is to do good for the American people — to get this debt under control, to do smart deficit reduction, and to do things that we think can grow the economy and get people back to work,” Ryan said.
Murray said, “It’s going to be a challenge, but we believe we can find common ground.”
At issue is almost $100 billion in automatic cuts to the more than $3 trillion federal budget in the new year — on top of across-theboard reductions that kicked in earlier this year.
Those reductions — agreed to after a 2011 debt limit standoff between Obama and House Republicans — have been the GOP’s greatest victory in the budget battles. They hewed closely to Boehner’s doctrine to offset every $1 increase in the debt with cuts. That approach, though, became politically unsustainable, as even Republicans balked over decimating defense and infrastructure spending.
But Republicans want to prevent reductions to Pentagon accounts, while Democrats want to protect education and social programs. These core differences have divided the parties historically and, in recent years, fueled by the GOP’s tea party flank, led to Washington’s cycle of brinkmanship.
Ryan has proposed doing away with some cuts by raising revenue from safety net programs, for example, asking wealthier seniors to pay more for Medicare, something Obama has also considered.
Sen. BobCorker, R-Tenn., who has emerged as a key broker in budget matters, called the 2011 Budget Control Act agreement “the single best vote I’ve had in the United States Senate.”
“It can be even better,” he said last week. “We can substitute some of the sequester for more thoughtful reductions.”
Obama once proposed significant entitlement changes as part of a grand bargain he sought to negotiate with Boehner that would also include new revenues through taxes and fees. But once Republicans drew the line against new taxes, Obama walked away.
“We very muchhope that our Republican colleagues will agree to talk about revenue,” said Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, during a TV interview.
Boehner, however, said last week that “raising taxes is not a viable option.”
Also complicating matters is that the GOP’s right flank promises to continue its failed fight to stop the Affordable Care Act. “This is not over,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, tweeted after last week’s vote.
All of which made the tone of Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee, seem understandable last week:
“I don’t think we should create great expectations.”