RSS Feed Menu
The Thursday vote on the Boehner debt ceiling bill was a clarifying moment, and one that should be reexamined as House Republicans now consider how to vote on a deal with the White House, announced on Sunday evening.
Firstly, the Boehner vote served to illustrate what separates those who would never raise the debt ceiling to those who could eventually be persuaded to compromise; those who were all bluster and those who seriously could not be convinced to raise the debt ceiling.
After all, what separates Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the chairman of the Republican Study Committee, from Rep. Allen West (R-FL)? West, a tea party favorite, voted ‘yes’ on the Boehner budget deal in the face of massive opposition from conservative activists, while Jordan, not especially notable to tea party activists, voted ‘no’.
A key element is that, with a couple of exceptions, the ‘no’ votes reside in overwhelmingly Republican districts where they have more to fear from a primary challenge than a scorned Republican Speaker. Indeed, the average Cook Partisan Voting Index score for a ‘no’ vote was R+11 (see below for full list). Allen West’s district, on the other hand, is a swing district with a D+1 rating.
Tea Party Republicans in less safe districts are sure now to use their vote on Boehner bill as cover against criticism that they were never willing to compromise and raise the debt ceiling. They voted for the Boehner bill, and now can safely vote against the coming bipartisan deal between House Republicans and the White House while being relatively inoculated from criticism that they were unwilling to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstance.
Secondly, the Boehner vote also allows us to reexamine the narrative that conservatives and tea party ideologues are driving the conversation in the House of Representatives. Some said that the delay of a vote on the Boehner bill from Thursday evening to Friday was a sign that the Speaker lacked sufficient support from his caucus. But when it gets down to the numbers, it’s clear that Boehner – not the tea party or conservative caucuses – is the one who is really running the show.
After adding a balanced budget amendment to his bill – a concept which he had already supported under Cut, Cap and Balance – and some of wrangling, Speaker Boehner was able to whip 91% – 218 of 240 – of his Republican conference into supporting a bill that raised the debt ceiling.
How did the tea party caucus – led by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) do? Only 12% of her 60 member caucus bucked the Speaker’s wishes.
Rep. Jim Jordan, chairman of the Republican Study Committee (RSC) – a caucus of conservative House members – fared slightly worse. Jordan’s Committee was subject to a bit of controversy last week after it was revealed that his staff members were actively encouraging outside conservative groups to target Republicans who might support the original Boehner plan. In the end, only about 10% of the RSC’s members went against the Speaker’s bill. So who is really in charge here?
At the time of this writing, word is that Republicans and Democrats have reached a tentative deal to raise the debt ceiling, and that the plan will be presented to each conference tonight and tomorrow morning. The vote will be a tough one – in the House, both Democrats and Republicans will have to convince about half their conferences to go along with the compromise in order for it to be approve.
But if there’s one thing that everyone can agree on, it’s that they want the dramatics and tensions to end – at least for a while. House and Senate staff have been working full throttle throughout the entire weekend, with the prospect of 1 a.m. votes hanging over their heads.
“Monday will be fun,” a Republican staff assistant remarked sarcastically to FrumForum after the deal was announced, in anticipation of the number of calls that will be made to the office the next morning.
“I’m just exhausted by all of this, and just want both sides to reach a conclusion. Everybody on the Hill is tired and wants this to be over with,” added a legislative staffer for a freshman House Republican to FrumForum Sunday evening.
RALPH NADER: Ideological inebriation on Capitol Hill – Torrington Register Citizen | Conservatives for America // Aug 1, 2011 at 2:17 am
[...] claimsCBS NewsParty Leaders Confront Skeptics in Their RanksBloombergUSA Today -FrumForum -phillyBurbs.com (blog)all 350 news [...]
Did Boehner Win – or Did Bachmann Lose? – FrumForum | Conservatives for America // Aug 1, 2011 at 2:47 am
[...] Did Boehner Win – or Did Bachmann Lose?FrumForumA key element is that, with a couple of exceptions, the 'no' votes reside in overwhelmingly Republican districts where they have more to fear from a primary challenge than a scorned Republican Speaker. Indeed, the average Cook Partisan Voting Index …Republican House leaders to brief rank-and-file on state of debt talksThe AustralianRepublican Boehner wants Monday vote on debt dealReutersA far cry from 'balanced approach'Financial TimesWashington Post (blog) -TPMDC -CBS Newsall 11,112 news articles » [...]
So, he won their support by adding something to the bill that had no chance whatsoever of passing?
Tim Mak:
Boehner NEGOTIATED with the MARXIST KENYAN USURPER HUSSEIN. He’s AN APPEASER.
/previewing the madness
Mod – I almost missed your /preview. Had me worried there for a minute.
But you’re right, of course.
From the other end of the spectrum, it can be said that Obama caved in to the terrorists who were perfectly willing to shoot their hostage (our nation’s economy) if they weren’t able extort enough concessions.
Obama’s first mistake might be said to have negotiated with terrorists at all. Everyone knows that you never, ever negotiate with terrorists – it always ends badly. But what choice did he have?
Assuming Boehner and Pelosi herd their cats and get the votes for the negotiated deal, is anybody a bigger winner than Bachmann? She’s probably the one who stood the most to lose by Armadebtdon. I’m not sure how seriously she’s taken anyway, but had we bumped our head on the ceiling and had the resulting economic mess, she, as cheerleader in chief of the “no raise” camp would have had no hope of ever being taken seriously again.
With this deal, she still keeps her Tea Party credentials by being “the lone voice of sanity” (to them, at least), and is spared having her curtain pulled back and being demonstrably proven to be little more than a political bomb thrower with no responsible bone in her body.
Bachmann is definitely the big winner. She can continue to spout her nonsense without her base seeing first-hand the consequences of what she advocates. Republican primary voters will conclude that the “moderate” presidential candidates are sellouts who blinked in their negotiations with the hated usurper Obama.
Meanwhile, Boehner looks weak. His caucus turned its back on his personally-drafted plan, which was always DOA in the Senate. There is no Balanced Budget Amendment – the crazy issue that Constitution-loving Tea Partiers wanted most of all (even though it would render our nation impotent and ungovernable). The final bill will be turned down by a big chuck of the Republican caucus and require Democratic votes to pass! The horror!
Boehner’s days as Speaker are numbered. That doesn’t make me sad, but I’m not looking forward to Speaker Cantor.
I don’t agree that Boehner looks weak. He was the only one that was able to get any kind of bill passed and did this even with the lunatic fringe being part of the equation.
Bachmann “wins”, if it’s a choice between her and Boner.
But I find it interesting that very few (if any) conservatives are talking about the real elephant in the room. Romney has been almost invisible in the debt debate. That deserves some examination by Republicans who are throwing flames at Obama, calling him weak and declaring him a failed leader.
Jesus- Romney is your FRONT RUNNER. What -and where- was his leadership on this issue? Bachmann may be crazy and Huntsman may be milquetoast-y, but at least they both had the balls to state their positions, to offer primary voters at least a glimpse of who they are and what they might do in a crisis. Romney stood by like the slick cat he’s always been and let the debate rage without really offering any solution or even a deep thought. And Republicans, in large part, are letting him stand down.
When your leaders duck major issues and you let them, you deliver what you cultivate: Leadership that hides, just when we need them the most.
Excellent points, practicalgirl. What a surprise – Romney pulls another weaselly opportunist stunt. I expect, when all the voting is safely done, that he’ll recover his voice to give lip service to the hostage-takers, safely hidden behind the reality that no one was forced to find out first-hand what disastrous consequences would have flowed from a default.
Will have to research what if anything Rick Perry had/has to say about the debate. Most likely he’ll take the same path: after-the-fact lip service that further encourages the extremists, while protected from having the consequences of a default clearly visible.
Nobody wins in this rediculous sideshow. Both Congress and the President’s rating are sliding, the economy is on the verge of a double-dip recession and job creation is stuck.
Bachmann is not a winner. Less than 10% joined her in a no vote. The rest of the House and Senate GOP began to realize that default could have huge consequences and it would be irresponsible to vote no. Yes, she can claim purity which will help her with 10% – 15% of the GOP electorate. That’s enough to get you a reality show, but not enough to win the nomination. Boehner comes off better. (A) He got a deal. (B) His deal had no tax revenues. Cantor comes off weaker. He didn’t help the Tea Party and Boehner knows that Cantor can’t be trusted.
Obama didn’t win. He got a deal, but he caved on every issue (other than the most important one which was get the debt ceiling raised), he has alienated his base. Because the last 3 months of this has contributed to possibly creating a double-dip recession, it means he continues to get blamed for the bad economy and lack of job creation – the one thing that could cause him to lose the election.
As for Romney; PracticalGirl thinks he should be a leader. In fact what he what he wants to be is a successful politican. I think Romney comes out best. He didn’t support the Tea Party position which is fine, they will not vote for him as long as Bachmann (or Perry) is in the race and he didn’t alienate centrist GOP or independents. If he wins the nomination (and Bachmann won’t win with 10-15% of the GOP vote, only Perry is a real threat and I don’t see another Texas Governor winning right now), the Tea Party will have to decide between Romney and Obama and that’s an easy one for them. He still doesn’t beat Obama in the general unless the economy and job market are worse than they are today.
Hey! it’s pretty simple! If the country doesn’t default on their financial obligations, EVERYBODY wins! Republicans and Dems can fight like ‘cats and dogs’, but once in a while the have to get together to fight for the 200+ million people they are paid to represent! A lot of people seem to view this as a battle of the political ‘titans’, well it’s a LOT more serious than that! The country’s financial security MAY be at stake! THAT is a LOT more serious than political ‘grand-standing’! It’s like a war!, once you are involved, there is no option other than victory!
It depends on whether anyone is paying attention to what really just happened. The Speaker can’t possibly win if the deal is properly summarized as ‘an agreement to increase federal discretionary spending every year for the next decade from $1.043 trillion in 2012 to $1.234 trillion in 2021′. Rep. Bachmann should shout these insane numbers from the rooftop as she votes ‘No’. Then she can rightly declare herself the winner.
The unemployed lost. The financial well being of the country lost. Wall Street won -big surprise. By 1937 we were coming out of the depression due to massive government spending in infrastructure. Roosevelt following bad advice decided to balance the budget in 1937. This threw the country back into another recession causing the depression to linger until massive government spending (World war 2) pulled the country out of the depression and started the longest economic recovery in history.
Obama lost any claim to leadership of the Democratic party and its principles. He will still be re-elected by people holding their nose because the the lunatic fringe known as the RepublicanParty scares the shit of anyone to the left of the Tea Party. It will be years before this country has another opportunity to finance new infrastructure at such low rates of interest. Aid to education will be cut, no matter what they say today. An ignorant and uneducated populace is easier to govern. They will swallow the demagoguery that passes for facts. You do not have to control the press you just have to control the school curriculum. Let Texas continue to write the text books and they will believe the most preposterous lies. H.L. Mecken “The people get the government they deserve”
If you can set aside party and intra-party considerations, the entire country lost badly as we are already being attacked internationally for our irresponsible behavior toward the world economy. Why would the world want us to be in charge of anything now? Why would they risk using the dollar for anything? We are no longer among the adults in the world. The entire country’s reputation has probably been irreparably harmed. Thanks for your contributions to our decline, Tea Party.