There’s no actual connection between the release of a draft budget resolution by Rep. Paul Ryan yesterday, and what appears to be a stalemate in negotiations over a short-term appropriations measure, that could trigger a partial shutdown of the federal government.
But you have to wonder, given all the talk from Republicans about Ryan’s incredible boldness and courage, and from Democrats about the dire consequences of what he is proposing, if the public is going to make a connection on its own. As Mark Blumenthal explains at Pollster today, polls show a very volatile situation in terms of the “blame” assigned if the government shuts down. Self-identified Democrats are much more supportive of a compromise by their side than are Republicans. But the perception that Republicans have introduced a new, radical note in the “budget” negotiations (which is how most media have described the appropriations battle) could influence the reactions of both self-identified Democrats and independents in the direction of anger towards the GOP for upsetting a delicate situation.
We’ll soon see how it plays out, but it is worth remembering that most folks make little or no distinction between short-term and long-term budget fights, and have every reason to figure that Paul Ryan is leading Republicans into a confrontation with Democrats over his aspirations to end Medicare and Medicaid as we’ve know them.
This year’s big media narrative has been the confirmation saga of Neera Tanden, Biden’s nominee for director of the Office of Management and Budget. At New York I wrote about how over-heated the talk surrounding Tanden has become.
Okay, folks, this is getting ridiculous. When a vote in the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on the nomination of Neera Tanden was postponed earlier this week, you would have thought it presented an existential threat to the Biden presidency. “Scrutiny over Tanden’s selection has continued to build as the story over her uneven reception on Capitol Hill stretched through the week,” said one Washington Post story. Politico Playbook suggested that if Tanden didn’t recover, the brouhaha “has the potential to be what Biden might call a BFD.” There’sbeen all sorts of unintentionally funny speculation about whether the White House is playing some sort of “three-dimensional chess” in its handling of the confirmation, disguising a nefarious plan B or C.
Perhaps it reflects the law of supply and demand, which requires the inflation of any bit of trouble for Biden into a crisis. After all, his Cabinet nominees have been approved by the Senate with a minimum of 56 votes; the second-lowest level of support was 64 votes. One nominee who was the subject of all sorts of initial shrieking, Tom Vilsack, was confirmed with 92 Senate votes. Meanwhile, Congress is on track to approve the largest package of legislation moved by any president since at least the Reagan budget of 1981, with a lot of the work on it being conducted quietly in both chambers. Maybe if the bill hits some sort of roadblock, or if Republican fury at HHS nominee Xavier Becerra (whose confirmation has predictably become the big fundraising and mobilization vehicle for the GOP’s very loud anti-abortion constituency) reaches a certain decibel level, Tanden can get out of the spotlight for a bit.
But what’s really unfair — and beyond that, surreal — is the extent to which this confirmation is being treated as more important than all the others combined, or indeed, as a make-or-break moment for a presidency that has barely begun. It’s not. If Tanden cannot get confirmed, the Biden administration won’t miss a beat, and I am reasonably sure she will still have a distinguished future in public affairs (though perhaps one without much of a social-media presence). And if she is confirmed, we’ll all forget about the brouhaha and begin focusing on how she does the job, which she is, by all accounts, qualified to perform.
