Mediaboss Marketing

Here are some thoughts on todays three-week deal in Congress to reopen the government, take a vote on an unspecified immigration bill, and fund the Childrens Health Insurance Program for six years:

1) Theres a rollicking debate on Twitter over whether Democrats caved. Ill confess that Im mystified by this argument. For the moment, this seems like a good deal but its impossible to say anything definitive without knowing what happens over the next three weeks.

2) Consider what we dont know about what comes next. We dont know which immigration bill, or bills, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will bring to the Senate floor. We dont know if any immigration compromise passes the Senate. We dont know if an immigration bill that passes the Senate will get a vote in the House. Even if it does get a vote in the House, we dont know if itll pass. And if it does pass, we dont know if Trump will sign it.

3) We also dont know what the implicit Democratic position is here. If Democrats get a fair vote in the House and Senate on an immigration deal and it doesnt pass, will they shut down the government again in three weeks? Put differently, is this a deal about a fair process or about a particular outcome? If Democrats dont get a deal and they shut the government back down in three weeks, its hard to see what was lost here.

4) Democratic opponents of the deal believe that an extended shutdown increases the likelihood of a DREAMer compromise. But does it? That is to say that an extended shutdown will cause Trump so much political or personal pain that he will accept one of the immigration compromises he has thus far rejected. Neither dynamic is obvious to me.

5) Politically, Trumps entire brand is anti-immigration politics, and if there is round-the-clock news coverage of a shutdown over immigration, hell think its good for his base. Personally, Trumps goal in life is to be seen as a winner, and to double down when attacked or under pressure, and so its hard to see how a high-stakes battle over a shutdown which would make a deal on immigration look like a cave to reopen the government by Trump helps.

6) Beyond that, shutting down the government should be a last resort in the most extreme situations (if that). And historically, shutting down the government usually doesnt end with the party that forced the shutdown getting the policy concessions it wants it often strengthens the presidents party. To the extent theres an open path in which an immigration deal can be negotiated and brought to a vote with the government still open, thats a good thing.

7) One counterargument: McConnells word hasnt been worth much this year. Just ask Sens. Susan Collins (ME) and Jeff Flake (AZ), fellow Republicans who were promised health and immigration policies in return for their tax votes. In this case, though, if McConnell reneges on the deal, Democrats simply shut down the government in three weeks. They havent lost that leverage.

8) And if Democrats do need to shut down the government in three weeks, theyll do so with the Childrens Health Insurance Program funded for six years, rather than seeing it weaponized against them. Thats a big deal, both substantively and politically.

9) Theres a broader political dynamic worth considering here too. Republicans pioneered a brand of politics in which creating crises in government operations became proof of sincerity, regardless of whether it led to good outcomes or who got hurt along the way. If you didnt employ every tactic in service of your promises to the base, you were a liar it wasnt acceptable to say, We dont have the votes; we need to win more elections.

10) At the time, Democrats angrily criticized that approach, arguing that all-out tactical war would be terrible for the country, that some boundaries and norms were worth preserving, that elections were the proper method of resolution. Now Im hearing a lot of the same arguments from Democrats: If they dont shut the government down, or keep it shut down, it will be a betrayal of their base.

11) Democrats also feel, understandably, that they cant unilaterally disarm. If Republicans are going to use the basic functioning of the government as leverage, then Democrats have to do so too.

12) The logic of that is inarguable, and the consequences disastrous. If hostage-taking becomes normalized in American politics, then theres really no end to the cycle of escalation, and its going to finish with a global economic crisis because we breached the debt ceiling, or worse.

13) The central political problem in American life, for years now, has been that the Republican Party is a dysfunctional institution that has abandoned principles of decent governance in order to please an ever more extreme base. I dont have an answer for fixing that. But it would be doubly bad if their outrageous behavior drives Democrats to use the same tactics in response. American politics is, hopefully, an infinite game, not a finite game, and that means doing everything possible to steer away from retaliatory loops that clearly lead to the system crumbling.

Read the rest here:
Government shutdown deal: Democrats didnt cave on the ...