|
 |
 |
David Meeske: do you think that Rs will get so frustrated by Dem resistance to voting to pass the CR/the shutdown happens and last long enough to cause real pain that they might actually nuke the filibuster to get the House-passed CR through? What are your thoughts on if this would be good/bad thing to happen (i.e. nuking filibuster)?
It’s definitely possible, and would be a perfectly fine resolution as far as I’m concerned—the demise of the filibuster would be good for Dems long term, and Dems could still treat the CR vote as a statement of no-confidence in the Trump government).
But I suspect that whether it happens will depend the sustainability of the Democrats’ posture. Here’s JD Vance in so many words, saying ‘hey, sure, let’s have a negotiation over ACA premiums—but first, you have to drop your filibuster and reopen the government.’
That premium support program doesn’t even expire until next year. So why are you shutting down the government on October 1 because of a program that doesn’t even expire for another few months. Let’s talk about it, let’s negotiate, let’s do what you do in Washington, D.C.
Vance’s position will strike many people as extremely reasonable, which will in turn increase pressure on Dems to cave outright, and reduce pressure on Republicans to nuke the filibuster.
Alternatively, Dems could switch postures to the one I’ve advocated: Sorry, we simply can’t vote for a deal that you will abrogate and use to violate the law. Suddenly Democrats would be the ones on reasonable ground, and Republicans would have to make a decision: Negotiate away Trump’s claim of dictatorial power over the budget, or abolish the filibuster and cut Dems out of the process altogether.
Consider this exchange between Michael Linden, a longtime Democratic budget wonk, and Liam Donovan, who’s a Republican lobbyist, but a fairly straight shooter.
 |
Linden is completely correct about the real reason Democrats can’t cave, but you’ll notice it has nothing to do with health care. A thousand versions of this exchange are happening across the political elite this week, and if through that process of argumentation, Democrats belatedly recognize that they need to change the basis of their demands, then the ball will be in the GOP’s court. It’s getting pretty late in the game, though.
Forced to choose, I suspect Senate Republicans would rather abolish the filibuster than stand up to Trump. That’s why I began this answer by saying it’s possible. But they may have a vote-counting problem, insofar as several Republicans are pretty dug in against abolishing the filibuster.
Kevin Thuot: Paint me a picture of what the country looks like in the scenario where a government shutdown starts this week and continues unabated through the 2028 election.
Not saying this likely, but do any aspects of this scenario look appealing relative to our baseline trajectory?
This is a fairly prohibitive challenge, but I’ll try...
Subscribe to Off Message to unlock the rest.
Become a paying subscriber of Off Message to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.
A subscription gets you:
 | Subscriber-only posts and full archive |
 |