\n\u201cWe got elected to tackle reckless spending. The President cannot say he refuses to negotiate and expect bipartisan support. We have divided government and the President needs to come to the table.\u201d<\/p>\n
<\/small><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/section>\n
I should acknowledge at the outset that I appreciate the fact that Bacon has engaged in this dialog. It\u2019s also worth emphasizing that were it not for his reputation for pragmatism and levelheadedness, I wouldn\u2019t be so focused on his perspective. When Freedom Caucus radicals demand Biden come to the table, it\u2019s predicable. When Bacon makes the same demand, it stands out as more important.<\/p>\n
So, let\u2019s flesh this out a bit \u2014 because the full faith and credit of the United States might very well depend on persuading Bacon and some of his colleagues.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m mindful of the fact that much of the media and much of the public instinctively values bipartisan negotiations. We\u2019ve all come to appreciate it when fair-minded policymakers of different parties and perspectives sit down, hear each other out, negotiate in good faith, and work toward a compromise solution. It\u2019s how sensible and responsible officials are supposed to conduct themselves in a mature political system.<\/p>\n
Does that mean the president has a responsibility to meet GOP lawmakers at the negotiating table in order to work out a deal? Actually, no, it does not.<\/p>\n
1. Debt ceiling crises aren\u2019t normal governing<\/strong>. In the United States, elected officials with policy goals rely on the American legislative system to pursue their priorities. It involves writing bills, having debates, rolling up sleeves, and trying to get their ideas through two chambers and onto the president\u2019s desk.<\/p>\nA debt ceiling crisis abandons the U.S. model for a radical alternative in which one party \u2014 the Republican Party \u2014 gets what it wants, not through the country\u2019s legislative system, but by threatening their own constituents. For a president to engage in such a process would be to lend it legitimacy it has not earned and does not deserve.<\/p>\n
2. The GOP has other options<\/strong>. To hear Bacon tell it, voters elected a small Republican House majority \u2014 while expanding the Democratic majority in the Senate \u2014 with the expectation that Congress would \u201ctackle reckless spending.\u201d I don\u2019t know if that\u2019s actually what the electorate wants, but let\u2019s say for the sake of conversation that the Nebraskan is right.<\/p>\nIf so, he and his colleagues can write a budget. They can craft appropriations bills. They can identify what spending they consider \u201cwasteful\u201d and \u201creckless.\u201d They can threaten to make this a campaign issue and target Democrats who defend unnecessary spending. They can urge the White House to work with them on these goals.<\/p>\n
What they cannot do is threaten to hurt Americans on purpose and expect a constructive response. Adults in positions of authority make substantive appeals; criminals make appeals while threatening others with deliberate harm.<\/p>\n
Four years ago at this time, we had a political landscape that looked a lot like the current one, except the party labels were reversed: Voters had just elected a small Democratic majority in the House while expanding the Republican majority in the Senate, all while there was a GOP president in the Oval Office.<\/p>\n
Imagine what the response would\u2019ve been if Democrats declared, \u201cWe got elected to protect health care benefits and we expect an immediate expansion of the Affordable Care Act. The president cannot say he refuses to negotiate. We have divided government and the president needs to come to the table or we\u2019ll cause a deliberate economic catastrophe.\u201d<\/p>\n
This would likely be seen as scandalous, and for good reason. The onus wouldn\u2019t be on Donald Trump to come to the negotiating table; the onus would be on the small Democratic majority in the House to stop threatening the public.<\/p>\n
And yet, here we are.<\/p>\n
3. Biden can\u2019t set a dangerous precedent<\/strong>. The American presidency is a unique office, as Biden seems to understand. If he were to negotiate with those threatening Americans, it would necessarily encourage others to also threaten Americans, wondering what kind of concessions they too could get out of the White House.<\/p>\nRewarding hostage takers leads to more hostages being taken. Rewarding radicalism leads to more radicals. Rewarding those who abandon the U.S. policymaking process leads others to abandon our system of government and take their chances with extortion schemes.<\/p>\n
Real, meaningful negotiations are possible, but not while Republicans point a gun at our economy.<\/p>\n
Circling back to our recent coverage<\/a>, Bacon\u2019s pitch effectively argues that Republicans are entitled, not only to pursue spending cuts, but also to threaten our collective wellbeing.<\/p>\nThat right does not exist. The House GOP majority has been handed an opportunity to participate in governing; it has not been given an opportunity to put economic stability in jeopardy in pursuit of conservative goals.<\/p>\n
To argue that the GOP majority is somehow entitled to a debt ceiling crisis, and the White House is obligated to go along with an extortion plot, is dangerously wrong. That way madness lies.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n