Dark Brandon: missing-in-action on the debt-budget hostage deal

The debt ceiling farce began as a dumb, First-World-War era stunt that was never constitutional in the first place. The 14th Amendment requires the federal government to honor its debts.

It has now become a one-sided parliamentary maneuver that Republicans use against Democrats but Democrats never use against Republicans. And one that corporate Democrats like Biden now, and Obama before him (with much assistance from Biden as Vice President), use as a political cover to give major donors and corporate lobbyists what the want to give them anyway.

Joe Biden’s hostage deal with Kevin McCarthy really looks to me like a throwback to the bad old dealmaking that so infuriated then-Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid back in 2011.¹ So far, Dark Brandon hasn’t shown up for this one.²

Sam Seder gives a good rundown here on why this is a genuinely bad deal.³

Economist Jamie Galbraith has provided a helpful description of the options that were available to Biden if the Republicans refuse to raise the phony debt limit.

[T]he mandate of the 14th Amendment is neither “far-fetched” nor unclear. It specifies that the “validity of the public debt” of the United States, “authorized by law… shall not be questioned.” Public debt includes pensions (the original purpose of the amendment was to protect Civil War veterans’ pensions) and all other payments “authorized by law.” This is the Constitution. Contrary to many commentators, it is not something the President may choose to “invoke.” It is a provision, like all the others, that he has sworn to uphold.⁴

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) guru Stephanie Kelton writes, “The real risk—and the lasting damage—will come from the destructive messaging that both sides have engaged in for the better part of two years.“⁵

But she also describes some of the real and immediate harms it would bring for real people:

Among other things, the deal would expand food stamp access for veterans and the homeless, while imposing work requirements that make it harder for some Americans to qualify for the benefits they need. And although some democratic pundits have called the work requirements “trivial,” the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities describes them as “harmful,” pointing out that they will “increase hunger and poverty” among poor older Americans.

President Biden has claimed that the deal “reduces spending while protecting critical programs for working people.” But it clearly spells added hardship for some, including those who will find it difficult or impossible to satisfy new work requirements and those who might be forced to start repaying student loan debt after being told their debts had been approved for cancellation.

The deal contains nasty, retrograde stuff out of the neoliberal-austerity playbook. The progressives in the Democratic House caucus really should fight to kill this deal and force Biden into calling off this cynical game and use the tools he has readily available to ignore the unconstitutional debt limit. But, as we unfortunately saw when the House Progressive Caucus last year caved to Joe Manchin on the Build Back Better plan, based on phony assurances by Biden and Nancy Pelosi, they haven’t been willing to use the clout they have to actually block bad deal-making by the ConservaDems.

Robert Reich is generally on the progressive side on economic issues. But he has taken a position on the deal that concedes way too much to conventional Democratic excuse-making.⁶ “Whether the deal is good or bad is irrelevant. It’s the only deal. The alternative is chaos,” he wrote. “Republicans have succeeded in holding the nation hostage, and now we must pay the ransom that’s been negotiated.”

We might characterize this position as a version of the neoliberal TINA mantra (There Is No Alternative). But in his Substack newsletter, he adds a footnote that hedges it a more Mugwump view:

Since writing this I’ve learned more about the specifics. There’s a lot not to like about the deal — especially the work requirement it places on poor people under age 55 without kids and the absurd cuts in IRS funding. But the overall spending freeze isn’t all that different from what would have resulted from another round of continuous resolutions, assuming no agreement on the budget — except for one grotesque fact: The deal paves the way for more debt-ceiling hostage taking in future years by Republican crazies. And, of course, none of this had to happen if Biden and Dems had used their majorities when they had control over both houses of Congress to raise the debt ceiling (or, ideally, eliminate it altogether), or if Schumer and Pelosi had made Democratic votes to raise the debt ceiling during the Trump administration contingent on a much longer-term increase in the ceiling.⁷

Julia Rock of The Lever is more blunt:

President Joe Biden, a famously bad negotiator who has pushed for cuts to social programs in the past, has negotiated with the hostage takers. Lawmakers in his own party are reportedly “anxious” that the president has been ignoring the old adage about negotiating with terrorists. …

The current standoff over the debt ceiling is a pathetic spectacle. Initially designed to allow the United States to borrow money during World War I, the debt ceiling now exists as an arbitrary limit on government borrowing that Congress raises pro forma each time the country approaches that cap. But sometimes, lawmakers use the threat of a default — which could cause millions of people to lose their jobs, a freeze on Social Security payments, a spike in U.S. borrowing costs, and a recession that would reverberate across the world — as a nuclear bargaining chip to impose austerity measures.

The standoff gives cover to politicians and dark money interests to push unpopular and punitive cuts under the guise of negotiating over the debt ceiling. [my emphasis]⁸

Democrats need to stop playing this ugly game. There is no foreseeable prospect that the Republicans will do so. It works for them. The Democrats should not have played along with this round of this blackmail game. But they have, because they wanted to.

1. Alter, Jonathan & Brown, Carrie Budoff (2023): Power play: Reid sidelined Biden. Politico 10/08/2023. <https://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/joe-biden-government-shutdown-debt-ceiling-097969> (Accessed: 2023-30-05).

2. Sharp, Sarah Rose (2023): Behold the Rise of “Dark Brandon”. Hyperallergic 08/10/2022. <https://hyperallergic.com/753543/behold-the-rise-of-dark-brandon/> (Accessed: 2023-30-05). Image from Yang Quan.

3. News Day Tuesday! | MR Live. The Majority Report YouTube channel 05/30/2023. (Accessed: 2023-30-05).

4. Galbraith, James (2023): More "Dangerous Nonsense" From The New York Times on the Debt Ceiling. The Nation 05/18/2023. <https://www.thenation.com/article/economy/debt-ceiling-mcconnell-treasury/> (Accessed: 05/18/2023).

5. Kelton, Stephanie (2023): The Deficit Myth is Hanging On for Dear Life. The Lens 05/30/2023. <https://substack.com/inbox/post/124412934> (Accessed: 2023-30-05).

6. Reich, Robert (2023): The debt ceiling deal isn’t perfect but it’s the only one – and it must pass. The Guardian 05/28/2023. <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/28/debt-ceiling-deal-house-biden-mccarthy> (Accessed: 2023-30-05).

7. Reich, Robert (2023): The deal: The only question that counts right now is whether McCarthy and Biden can get the count. Substack 05/28/2023. (Accessed: 2023-30-05).

8. Rock, Julia (2023): The Debt Ceiling Standoff Has Been A Performance. The Lever 08/28/2023. <https://www.levernews.com/the-debt-ceiling-standoff-has-been-a-performance/> (Accessed: 2023-30-05).