The Mess and the Messages

food bank line

Things indeed moved fast, but for many in unexpected ways.  When five Democrats in the US Senate concluded their negotiations with Senate Republican leadership, they (together with the three already on record voting against the government shutdown) provided sufficient votes to pass a resolution reopening the federal government.  In short order King Chaos mumbled his support and the House is expected to comply.  The longest shutdown in history may soon be over.  Just like that.

The compromise did not include a guarantee that certain Obamacare credits will not be cancelled in December, causing millions to lose healthcare coverage and many more to see coverage bills skyrocket-- the very issue that Democrats rallied around to force and maintain the shutdown.  And that sparked immediate cries of outrage.  How could they do it especially so soon after the overwhelming electoral victories on Tuesday, that created a political crisis for Republicans?

Rachel Maddow's commentary was withering, under the banner of "snatching defeat from the jaws of victory" (which I admit was my exact first reaction.)  But Rachel, Stephen Colbert and others were incorrect when they said that the Democrats "got nothing" in the deal.  They got more money for SNAP benefits, rehiring and back pay for federal workers fired and threatened during the shutdown, and the promise of a Senate vote on those Obamacare credits in early December.  And they got at least a somewhat functioning federal government again, so that people depending on SNAP get their food and the air traffic system doesn't collapse.

But the difference in analysis was striking.  Rachel and Lawrence O'Donnell, who generally agree on just about everything, did not agree on this at all.  O'Donnell spoke from his experience as a high level staffer in the Senate.  He said that every shutdown ends in a compromise, and that Republicans compromised as well.  That the minority party has never successfully forced its demands to be met in a shutdown.  That Senators are much more independent traditionally than House members, and so no Senate majority or minority leader has determined all that party's votes.  

For as stark as this looked at first, there are wheels within wheels. It may also be that Senate Republicans (Lawrence suggested) ignored King Chaos' solution of ending the filibuster and themselves forced their compromise, as long as it was short of what they knew the King would not countenance--action on Obamacare credits.

Heather Cox Richardson provided other analyses.  She noted stories that said that other Democratic Senators beyond those eight were ready to compromise, and that it seems unlikely that it was mere coincidence that none of the eight were up for reelection next year or even in the next cycle.  They probably represented a larger number.  

After most headlines suggested these Democrats had "caved," and indeed both Senate and House as well as Democratic party leadership were against their compromise, stories began to appear that speculated the Democrats really didn't lose politically on the shutdown or this compromise.  There were nearly identical stories in both the Washington Post and the New York Times like that on Tuesday.  They note that the entire country now knows that the shutdown happened over the issue of the Obamacare credits, which the latest polls show are favored by 78% of Americans. It previously was just one outrage among too many.  Some--like HCR--suggest the Senate vote on those credits may turn out to be different from what is expected.  There may even be some pressure from at least some Republicans in the House on this issue.  In a broader sense, the Republicans find themselves on the wrong side of the affordability issue even more sharply.

Other analysts put it this way: The Democrats were united and showed some fight for more than 40 days. That energized resistance, and the resistance energized them.  But they were never going to get those credits restored.  As commentator Tim Miller said, "You can't play chicken with somebody who wants to crash."  And others point out: the bill that the Senate passed funds the government only through January.  There is more to come.

Others argue that the Democrats must maintain their identity also as the party of governance.  The shutdown was starting to inflict real harm.  Lawrence noted that the people affected by losing SNAP benefits were more numerous that those affected by the Obamacare premium credits.  Heather highlighted the grave harm the air traffic mess, slowdown and approaching chaos was causing not just to travelers but to the movement of freight, and therefore to the economy.  

If the Democrats miscalculated, others suggest, it was because the Chaos administration is unique in the degree of its cruelty and its lack of conscience. Chaos refused to negotiate or respond in any way to the healthcare crisis their legislation caused, including the Obamacare credits cut but also slashing Medicaid.

The administration was willing to let people go hungry, go without medical care, while Chaos threw lavish parties on the weekends, and the rest of the Chaos leadership could fly in its private planes and continue to rob the treasury for their own comfort and riches.  "They are pathologically unwilling to help Americans in need," Paul Krugman wrote, and now that should be obvious to everyone.

Maybe, as some like Ezra Klein asserted, King Chaos will take this as another instance of his successful bullying, but the situation continues to be dynamic, and so far this does not appear to be helping much to remedy the Republican political crisis.  Chaos by its nature is unpredictable, and its fomenters may not be able to control it for long.  A lot more is happening than this compromise, and much of that still indicates--as did the elections-- trouble for the administration and Republicans, and a new spirit, a new energy and a new resolve to counter Chaos, and to do better for the country.