Just say no 3


By Tom Quiner

May I juxtapose two e-mails I received today?

The first one came from Abby Witt who works for President Obama’s political action machine, Organizing for Action (yes, I receive their e-mails to see how they craft their marketing messages).

Their subject line:  “Say NO to a shutdown.”

Just a half hour earlier, I received an e-mail from conservative political consultant/pundit, Dick Morris.

His subject line:  “Say No to GOP Suicide.”

At least Morris didn’t put the word “no” in all caps.

Abby (she thinks we’re on a first name basis) makes her case:

Tom —

If you had a big deadline coming up at work, what would happen if you just watched cat videos and refused to do your job?

Some House Republicans are treating the deadline for Congress to pass a budget like it’s not all that serious. They’ve decided that they don’t like Obamacare, so they’re going to refuse to pass any budget that includes funding for it. And if they get their way, our government will shut down after September 30th.

So buckle up, Tom, because we’re in for a showdown — and OFA is going to spend every damn day from now till the budget deadline reminding John Boehner what he needs to do.

We need your voice on this — add your name, and join the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are saying “NO” to a shutdown.

Some of these guys are so far gone that as we head toward a government shutdown, Speaker Boehner had the gall to call a bill that defunded Obamacare “a victory for common sense.”

But we’re seeing signs of pressure mounting on them to do the right thing. Even Karl Rove came out publicly to say that John Boehner needs to stand up to this extreme plan that would shut down the government.

We can’t afford to play nice here — join this fight, and tell John Boehner to get the job done:

http://my.barackobama.com/Say-No-to-a-Shutdown

Thanks,

Abby

Abby Witt
Deputy National Director of Issue Campaigns
Organizing for Action

Mr. Morris (we’re not on a first-name basis) makes his case for saying no:

The Republican base must not require its representatives in Congress to run off a cliff and commit suicide as the price of avoiding a primary challenge in 2014. The Tea Party must not eat its young.

Polling shows that there are nowhere near the pre-conditions in place that would be necessary for a government shutdown over defunding ObamaCare. Americans oppose defunding it by 44 percent to 38 percent, according to a recent CNBC All-America Economic Survey — and when it comes to shutting down the government to force its defunding, opposition swells to 19-59.

To force Republican congressmen to side with the 19s against the 59s is to endanger the gains the party made in 2010 and hasten the day of Democratic control of the House.

How do voters reconcile their opposition to ObamaCare with their opposition to a government shutdown to defund it? Think of the issue of teachers’ pay and schools: voters strongly favor increases in teacher pay, but they just as strongly oppose teacher strikes, which close down schools as a way of achieving higher pay.

The whole idea of a government shutdown is a huge negative, implying a total instability of the two parties to co-exist or to govern. And polling suggests that voters are far more likely to blame Republicans for gridlock and conflict in Washington than Democrats. Instead of baiting its supporters to shut down the government to defund ObamaCare, the Tea Party and base voters should be demanding a firm stand on increasing the debt limit. While voters feel there is nothing positive to be achieved by shutting down the government, they do agree with stopping additional government borrowing until or unless there are substantial cuts in spending.

Debt, especially government debt, has a bad odor in this era of a $16 trillion national debt. Extending the debt limit — raising the limit on the government’s credit card — has a very bad feel to it if it is not matched by a cut in public spending.

The Republican insistence on sequester cuts as the price for the last debt-limit extension triggered the first real deficit reduction since the Clinton years. While some felt the sequester was a negative for Republicans, it was not — it is just what the public wants.

Republicans should pass enough of a debt-limit expansion to accommodate debt service payments for 30 days and then demand that any further expansion be subject to spending cuts. Eliminating the medical device tax, scaling back ObamaCare, capping means-tested entitlements like Medicaid and food stamps and even basic tax reform should be on the agenda. Having cut discretionary spending to very low levels, Republicans should turn to entitlements — not Social Security or Medicare, but to welfare spending, and insist on caps.

If the Democrats stand firm and demand a clean debt-limit expansion, Republicans could then force a government shutdown by refusing to raise the debt limit (except to pay debt service already owed). While this will be the same battle as the one that ensued over the continuing resolution, it would be on very different and much more advantageous terrain. Voters would see the link between spending cuts and the debt limit and would heartily approve of the Republican position. President Obama, on the other hand, would find himself begging to be allowed more borrowing — not a good message to have to sell.

It kind of gives me the warm fuzzies when liberals and conservatives can agree on something, even if it is “just say no.”

Nancy Reagan would be proud.

For the record, I’m with Morris on this one.

3 comments

  1. I always wondered why the U.S. would borrow money and then turn around and give out so much in foreign aid. A few years back, I was involved with a project in Israel. Something I never knew is that because we give foreign aid to Israel, they are in return required to spend “X” amount of money for U.S. based companies for sales and services.

    Some would argue this creates jobs for Americans. Some would say this further lines the pockets of companies like Haliburton. What is your take?

  2. Tom,

    You do have that way about you. I immediately felt at ease with you enough to where I assumed you would be okay if I called you Tom and not Mr. Quiner.

    A Loyal Quiner Diner Reader

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s