![\"An](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.dougsbriefcase.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/12\/credit-washington-post.jpg\")
<\/a>An angry John Boehn\u00ader (R\u2011OH<\/span>) lashed out at con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtive groups who opposed the bud\u00adget deal. The deal strength\u00adens his hand with his cau\u00adcus and in nego\u00adti\u00ada\u00adtions over changes to Oba\u00admacare. [Cred\u00adit: Wash\u00ading\u00adton Post]<\/p><\/div>\u201cFrankly, I think they\u2019re mis\u00adlead\u00ading their fol\u00adlow\u00aders. I think they\u2019re push\u00ading our mem\u00adbers in places where they don\u2019t want to be. And frankly, I just think that they\u2019ve lost all cred\u00adi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty.\u201d \u2013<\/em> House Speak\u00ader John Boehn\u00ader (R\u2011OH<\/span>), com\u00adment\u00ading on oppo\u00adsi\u00adtion<\/a> by con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtive groups to the bud\u00adget deal.\n Last week\u2019s over\u00adwhelm\u00ading House vote to rat\u00adi\u00adfy a mod\u00adest bud\u00adget agree\u00adment has been var\u00adi\u00adous\u00adly depict\u00aded as a defeat for the Tea Par\u00adty, a rare instance of bipar\u00adti\u00adsan\u00adship, and a moment of ratio\u00adnal\u00adi\u00adty in an oth\u00ader\u00adwise chaot\u00adic and dys\u00adfunc\u00adtion\u00adal bud\u00adget process. It is all of those things and some\u00adthing more: a new threat to the already trou\u00adbled imple\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion of Obamacare.<\/p>\n The Sen\u00adate is sched\u00aduled to vote tomor\u00adrow<\/a> on invok\u00ading clo\u00adture on the agree\u00adment. Should the Sen\u00adate fol\u00adlow the House\u00ad\u2019s lead, the like\u00adli\u00adhood of anoth\u00ader gov\u00adern\u00adment shut\u00addown on Jan\u00adu\u00adary 15 will become infin\u00adi\u00adtes\u00adi\u00admal. It would also serve as a rebuke to out\u00adside groups on the Left and Right. House Democ\u00adrats backed the deal, despite crit\u00adi\u00adcisms from labor unions that it requires fed\u00ader\u00adal work\u00aders to con\u00adtribute more to their pen\u00adsions and allows unem\u00adploy\u00adment ben\u00ade\u00adfits for an esti\u00admat\u00aded 1.3 mil\u00adlion<\/a> Amer\u00adi\u00adcans to expire lat\u00ader this month. House Repub\u00adli\u00adcans ignored their Tea Par\u00adty wing, which argued that the deal marked a retreat from the dis\u00adci\u00adpline of across-the-board cuts.<\/p>\n The con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtive argu\u00adment in favor of seques\u00adtra\u00adtion is a curi\u00adous one. Auto\u00admat\u00adic cuts were con\u00adceived in the bud\u00adget deal of 2011, a deal that many con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives fault\u00aded as too timid. The mea\u00adsure called for the cre\u00adation of a spe\u00adcial com\u00admit\u00adtee to write a bill to reduce fed\u00ader\u00adal bor\u00adrow\u00ading by $1.5 tril\u00adlion<\/a> over a decade. If that com\u00admit\u00adtee failed, which it inevitably did, auto\u00admat\u00adic cuts total\u00ading $1.2 tril\u00adlion<\/a> would take effect over a series of years. Those cuts would large\u00adly spare enti\u00adtle\u00adment pro\u00adgrams, which pose the most severe threats to the government\u2019s fis\u00adcal health, slash\u00ading mil\u00adi\u00adtary and domes\u00adtic spend\u00ading instead.<\/p>\n Con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives argued that these cuts were Pres\u00adi\u00addent Obama\u2019s idea<\/a> which, in their minds, is the cru\u00adelest insult imag\u00adin\u00adable. But in the wake of the President\u2019s re-elec\u00adtion, con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtive think\u00ading abrupt\u00adly changed. They embraced the President\u2019s seques\u00adtra\u00adtion pro\u00adpos\u00adal they once loathed, treat\u00ading it as though it were their great\u00adest achieve\u00adment. Sequester, instead of the con\u00adse\u00adquence of fail\u00adure, became the goal. When it came to reduc\u00ading deficits, con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives sud\u00adden\u00adly pre\u00adferred mind\u00adless across-the-board cuts to rea\u00adsoned pol\u00adi\u00adcy changes.<\/p>\n Their beef with this most recent bud\u00adget deal does have some mer\u00adit. They point out that, while the spend\u00ading increas\u00ades are imme\u00addi\u00adate, the off\u00adset\u00adting sav\u00adings will take years to mate\u00adri\u00adal\u00adize. The chart below [click on it to enlarge<\/em>] illus\u00adtrates their point.<\/p>\n Under the bud\u00adget deal, new fed\u00ader\u00adal spend\u00ading will amount to $63.2 bil\u00adlion<\/a>,<\/span> but it will be off\u00adset by a total of $85 bil\u00adlion in deficit reduc\u00adtion over a ten-year peri\u00adod, mean\u00ading that it will reduce the deficit by about $22 bil\u00adlion. As con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtive crit\u00adics have not\u00aded, the spend\u00ading increas\u00ades will be imme\u00addi\u00adate, while the sav\u00adings will take a decade to mate\u00adri\u00adal\u00adize. The deal allows fed\u00ader\u00adal spend\u00ading to increase by $63.2 bil\u00adlion over this year and next. Only $6.5 bil\u00adlion of that addi\u00adtion\u00adal spend\u00ading will be off\u00adset dur\u00ading that time. Advo\u00adcates of the deal argue that sav\u00adings mount over the years, and the chart cor\u00adrob\u00ado\u00adrates that. Sav\u00adings from 2016\u20132021 will amount to $31.2 bil\u00adlion. But even after eight years, the fed\u00ader\u00adal gov\u00adern\u00adment will remain in a hole: hav\u00ading spent $63.2 bil\u00adlion in just two years, it will still have have recov\u00adered only $37.7 bil\u00adlion after eight. The bulk of the sav\u00adings \u2013 and the entire $22 bil\u00adlion in deficit reduc\u00adtion \u2014 won\u2019t be real\u00adized until 2022 and 2023. So it is fair to say that the deal allows the gov\u00adern\u00adment to spend imme\u00addi\u00adate\u00adly and post\u00adpones the bulk of the sav\u00adings for nine or ten years.<\/p>\n That sav\u00adings are back-loaded is unavoid\u00adable. Repub\u00adli\u00adcans have often advanced, sup\u00adport\u00aded and vot\u00aded for tem\u00adpo\u00adrary relief from cuts whose costs are paid off over time. Spar\u00ading doc\u00adtors from sharp drops in Medicare reim\u00adburse\u00adment \u2013 some\u00adtimes for a year, some\u00adtimes for less \u2013 has become a bipar\u00adti\u00adsan Con\u00adgres\u00adsion\u00adal tra\u00addi\u00adtion. The costs of that relief are incurred straight\u00adaway; the off\u00adset\u00adting sav\u00adings typ\u00adi\u00adcal\u00adly take a decade to accu\u00admu\u00adlate. That is but one exam\u00adple of some\u00adthing that is char\u00adac\u00adter\u00adis\u00adtic of bills that Democ\u00adrats and Repub\u00adli\u00adcans alike have sup\u00adport\u00aded. To object in this one case is just a bit disingenuous.<\/p>\n Such objec\u00adtions also are odd because the agree\u00adment is so small \u2013 the $63.2 bil\u00adlion amounts to a 0.77 per\u00adcent increase<\/a> in fed\u00ader\u00adal spend\u00ading over the next two years; the $22 bil\u00adlion in deficit reduc\u00adtion a mere 0.3 per\u00adcent improve\u00adment in pro\u00adject\u00aded short\u00adfalls. It is sim\u00adply too incon\u00adse\u00adquen\u00adtial to jus\u00adti\u00adfy the feroc\u00adi\u00adty of crit\u00adi\u00adcism that some con\u00adser\u00adv\u00ada\u00adtives have launched.<\/p>\n The deal was reached pri\u00admar\u00adi\u00adly because it came at the right moment, fol\u00adlow\u00ading a roller-coast\u00ader ride dur\u00ading which both par\u00adties threw up on them\u00adselves mul\u00adti\u00adple times. The year dawned with the Pres\u00adi\u00addent win\u00adning his increase in income and pay\u00adroll tax\u00ades, a dispir\u00adit\u00ading defeat for House Repub\u00adli\u00adcan lead\u00aders. Con\u00adgress then defied the President\u2019s efforts to derail the first round of across-the-board cuts, leav\u00ading him to look weak and inef\u00adfec\u00adtu\u00adal as the pub\u00adlic ignored his dec\u00adla\u00adra\u00adtions about how dev\u00adas\u00adtat\u00ading the cuts were. Repub\u00adli\u00adcans were next to soil them\u00adselves, insist\u00ading that they could defund Oba\u00admacare on a stop\u00adgap spend\u00ading bill, pro\u00adduc\u00ading instead a gov\u00adern\u00adment shut\u00addown that left them dis\u00adcred\u00adit\u00aded. But not for long. Their blun\u00adder was fol\u00adlowed almost imme\u00addi\u00adate\u00adly by sto\u00adries about the bun\u00adgled healthcare.gov web\u00adsite and the President\u2019s grudg\u00ading acknowl\u00adedge\u00adment that mil\u00adlions had lost insur\u00adance cov\u00ader\u00adage he had repeat\u00aded\u00adly promised they could keep.<\/p>\n Even politi\u00adcians some\u00adtimes grow weary of polit\u00adi\u00adcal con\u00adflict, espe\u00adcial\u00adly after ser\u00adi\u00adal humil\u00adi\u00ada\u00adtions. Both par\u00adties saw the ben\u00ade\u00adfits of a bud\u00adget truce and both were hap\u00adpy to tell naysay\u00aders in their respec\u00adtive bases to take a hike.<\/p>\n Repub\u00adli\u00adcans stand to ben\u00ade\u00adfit most from the result\u00ading peri\u00adod of tran\u00adquil\u00adi\u00adty. When Con\u00adgress returns after the hol\u00adi\u00addays, the real prob\u00adlems with Oba\u00admacare will begin to sur\u00adface: many who had cov\u00ader\u00adage for years will find that they are new\u00adly unin\u00adsured, many who thought they had enrolled in poli\u00adcies will learn that they don\u2019t have cov\u00ader\u00adage, many who are cov\u00adered will find out that they can no longer see their doc\u00adtor or receive care from hos\u00adpi\u00adtal sys\u00adtems in their area. Con\u00adsumers will com\u00adplain about high pre\u00admi\u00adums, bur\u00adden\u00adsome cost-shar\u00ading, nar\u00adrow net\u00adworks and restric\u00adtive drug formularies.<\/p>\n Com\u00adpared with those prob\u00adlems, a dodgy web\u00adsite and mil\u00adlions of can\u00adcel\u00adla\u00adtion notices will seem insignif\u00adi\u00adcant by com\u00adpar\u00adi\u00adson. The White House will need a dis\u00adtrac\u00adtion from the health law\u2019s fail\u00adings. That is one rea\u00adson why Sen\u00adate Major\u00adi\u00adty Leader Har\u00adry Reid recent\u00adly announced that the Sen\u00adate would take up a bill to extend unem\u00adploy\u00adment ben\u00ade\u00adfits in Jan\u00adu\u00adary<\/a>. But such a bill, like ini\u00adtia\u00adtives to raise the min\u00adi\u00admum wage and change immi\u00adgra\u00adtion laws, are unlike\u00adly to divert atten\u00adtion from the health care flop.<\/p>\n Anoth\u00ader bud\u00adget stand\u00adoff, with the threat of anoth\u00ader gov\u00adern\u00adment shut\u00addown on Jan\u00adu\u00adary 15, might have done the trick. The bud\u00adget deal almost cer\u00adtain\u00adly takes that off the table, assum\u00ading the Sen\u00adate fol\u00adlows the House\u2019s lead and adopts the compromise.<\/p>\n Lack\u00ading that dis\u00adtrac\u00adtion, the Pres\u00adi\u00addent will find him\u00adself in a very weak posi\u00adtion. Democ\u00adrats who have been asked to trust the Admin\u00adis\u00adtra\u00adtion despite the law\u2019s stum\u00adbling roll-out may well wan\u00adder off the reser\u00adva\u00adtion once the next wave of bad news breaks. They could begin to insist on changes to the law that could fur\u00adther dam\u00adage its trou\u00adbled imple\u00admen\u00adta\u00adtion, pre\u00adsent\u00ading Repub\u00adli\u00adcans with a huge opportunity.<\/p>\n Which is why Speak\u00ader Boehn\u00ader laced his state\u00adments last week with unchar\u00adac\u00adter\u00adis\u00adtic ran\u00adcor and brava\u00addo. After a year of hav\u00ading to accept ill-con\u00adceived leg\u00adisla\u00adtive strate\u00adgies devised by back-benchers, inter\u00adest groups and radio talk show hosts, the bud\u00adget vote leaves Boehn\u00ader the unques\u00adtioned leader of his con\u00adfer\u00adence. That gives him the upper hand, should the White House and Con\u00adgres\u00adsion\u00adal Demo\u00adc\u00adra\u00adt\u00adic lead\u00aders lose their hold on mem\u00adbers. By this time next month, the Speak\u00ader may be in a posi\u00adtion to nego\u00adti\u00adate the con\u00adtours of a bipar\u00adti\u00adsan bill that would sev\u00ader the tie between the insur\u00adance indus\u00adtry and the admin\u00adis\u00adtra\u00adtion<\/a> on which the suc\u00adcess of Oba\u00admacare depends.<\/p>\n That out\u00adcome is hard\u00adly assured. The task is daunt\u00ading, the pol\u00adi\u00adtics del\u00adi\u00adcate. But the bud\u00adget deal accom\u00adplish\u00ades two impor\u00adtant things for Repub\u00adli\u00adcans: it removes a poten\u00adtial dis\u00adtrac\u00adtion from Oba\u00admacare by avert\u00ading a Jan\u00adu\u00adary gov\u00adern\u00adment shut\u00addown and it leaves the Speak\u00ader free to devise and exe\u00adcute a leg\u00adisla\u00adtive strat\u00ade\u00adgy with\u00adout inter\u00adfer\u00adence from out\u00adside groups.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" \u201c<\/span>Frankly, I think they\u2019re mis\u00adlead\u00ading their fol\u00adlow\u00aders. I think they\u2019re push\u00ading our mem\u00adbers in places where they don\u2019t want to be. And frankly, I just think that they\u2019ve lost all cred\u00adi\u00adbil\u00adi\u00adty.\u201d \u2013 House Speak\u00ader John Boehn\u00ader (R\u2011OH<\/span>), com\u00adment\u00ading on oppo\u00adsi\u00adtion by \u2026 Con\u00adtin\u00adue read\u00ading <\/a><\/p>\n