geoff: It's Friday.
That means it's time for the
analysis of brooks and Capehart.
That's "New York Times"
columnist David brooks and
Jonathan Capehart, associate
editor for "The Washington
post."
Good to see you both.
Here we are, another Friday of
late breaking news, this time on
the debt ceiling.
House speaker Kevin Mccarthy
said earlier this evening that
house Republican negotiators
will continue talks with the
white house, after the talks
fell apart today.
The negotiators tasked by him to
deal with the white house said
they would put the talks on hold
because they weren't productive.
Jonathan, what is your read on
what is happening?
Jonathan: We are getting down to
the wire, what we think is the
wire, with June 1 as the date
identified by the treasury
secretary.
But also because both the house
and senate will be out of
session next week for the
memorial day recess until may
29, the Monday into June 1.
Talks did not fall apart, there
was a short pause.
We heard about it late this
morning, early afternoon, and
now they will be back together
negotiating.
Part of me wonders if this is
all posturing on the part of
speaker Mccarthy.
We will see.
I'm trying not to hyperventilate
over every dot and tittle until
we get closer to June 1, but
there are things you need to
negotiate -- things they need to
negotiate and let's hope they
make progress.
Geoff: Deadlines have a way of
focusing the minds of the
members of congress.
We don't know what we don't
know, but this had the hallmarks
of a Republican pressure plate.
Senate Republican leader tweeted
earlier today, it is past time
for the white house to get
serious, time is of the essence.
David: I'm sure they both
thought the other was not coming
through.
I'm glad they are back together,
it's like they can't quit each
other, like a Taylor Swift
album.
It is dangerous even to put a
pause.
While I'm sure both sides are
negotiating in good faith, there
are elements of both parties
will take advantage of a pause
and say let's not do a deal.
The freedom caucus on the
Republican side is saying we
passed our bill, take it or
leave it.
That's like we are going to
govern by ourselves and the
Democrats don't exist.
There are a bunch of senators on
the democratic side that say use
the 14th amendment to ram
through our version.
That sounds ok legally but in my
view it would be disastrous
economically.
If I didn't try to use the 14th
amendment, it will go through
the court system, every decision
will create economic
uncertainty.
It will probably go to this
supreme court that will probably
overrule it.
They have to do with each other.
Geoff: President Biden said it
would be impractical because it
would take so much time.
Jonathan, let's talk more about
Democrats.
Progressives say they are
concerned president Biden might
give away too much and this
follows his comments about
toughening standards for a
social -- for social safety net
programs like food stamps.
How can he do deal with
house Republicans without
alienating members of his party
whose votes they need?
Jonathan: What we are talking
about are things that he did 30
years ago.
What impact that might have on
negotiations in 2023, we just
don't know.
We take Progressives as trying
to fill the void and sending a
message to the president, think
really hard about what you are
doing in the negotiating room.
It's good they are getting
together and talking.
Neither side is going to get
everything they want.
When it comes to work
requirements, we have to see.
I need to make a larger point --
speaker Mccarthy is trying to do
budgetary matters by holding the
economy hostage by the debt
ceiling.
When the president submitted his
budget on March 9, house
Republicans have yet to submit
their own budget.
That's where this discussion, if
speaker Mccarthy had any
confidence he could pass a
budget through regular order, he
would have submitted his own
budget.
Instead he is using the debt
ceiling as a way to ram through
his own priorities, things he
couldn't get through the house
and certainly could not get
through the senate on his own.
Geoff: How do you see it?
David: This has happened dozens
of times over the last many
decades of the last 40 times we
have the debt ceiling crisis, I
think 28 of those times a clear
majority, it was attached to a
spending bill.
We probably shouldn't do
budgeting this way but the fact
we've been doing it, Democrats
have been doing it, Republicans
doing it more.
It focuses the mind.
If -- both parties tend to blow
through deficits in its the only
mechanism we seem to have, crazy
as it is, to break down
spending.
Our average deficits
historically have been just over
3%.
Now over 6%.
We can't run that much debt year
on year.
Geoff: Let's shift our attention
to 2024, there are two major
amounts -- announcements
expected next week, Ron Desantis
and Tim Scott.
I think we could be forgiven by
not mirroring that Ron Desantis
is not already -- remembering
that Ron Desantis is not already
a candidate.
Jonathan: I'm going to put
something my colleague said this
morning and I believe he was
quoting someone else in talking
about governor Desantis in that
it seems as though the governor
is trying to be a different
version of Donald Trump, a
competent version of Donald
Trump, ramming through all of
these cultural war laws.
Signing things into law.
But it's like asking people to
choose between coke and new
coke.
When we went through that,
people made it clear, when given
the choice, they went for coke.
The lane Ron Desantis is trying
to occupy is not going to be
successful because if people
have to choose between trump and
governor Desantis, they are
going to go for trump.
The moment he makes it official
and becomes a candidate, I think
the scrutiny will be on how well
will you do under the spotlight
of a national presidential
campaign and with Donald Trump
knowing on his leg.
Geoff: Governor Desantis seems
like someone who could carry the
mantle of trumpism without the
baggage, that his poll numbers
have greater, there are
questions about his electability
should he make it to the general
election.
Can he bounceback?
David: He can, there's a reason
we have campaigns.
Right now, his campaign is a bit
of a mess.
Even this week he had a bunch of
conservative culture were type
issues, then he goes to new
Hampshire and poses as a
different kind of candidate, a
more moderate, business type
Republican.
You got to pick one.
Second, it was clearly a
terrible mistake not to announce
months ago and have been
campaigning and hit back at
Donald Trump.
I can't think of a time, all my
years covering politics, when
one candidate was beating the
daylights of the other candidate
and the other guy did not hit
back.
It is not the way to win.
There are fundamental structural
issues in this campaign he needs
to figure out.
Geoff: This week, Desantis told
donors and supporters in a
conference call there were only
three credible candidates in the
race, Joe Biden, Donald Trump
and himself.
He said Donald Trump could not
be Joe Biden again.
Is that an effective argument
given where he is in the polls
right now against Donald Trump?
Jonathan: It sounds like wishful
thinking.
You're trying to separate people
from their money in terms of
donors, you got to give them a
reason to believe.
The governor can believe their
only three people in the race
and he's the only candidate who
could beat president Biden,
sure, maybe he can win the
Republican nomination but he has
signed a number of things into
law in Florida that will make
him unpalatable to the general
electorate, and just his
signing, for example, the six
week abortion ban in Florida is
not going to play well on the
national stage.
I don't see how his happy talk
to donors is going to become
reality.
Geoff: Is there room for Tim
Scott in this race?
David: I think he's
underestimated right now.
He is a good person, a nice
person, which sets him apart
from the other competitors.
There may be a lane for that guy
is a good man, let's go for that
guy.
He has a fair amount of money.
I think there's a chance, and he
is an effective legislature that
something's across the line.
They have and always worked out
but he's been active in the
senate.
Geoff: What do you think,
Jonathan, to go back to coke
versus new coke analogy, is
there room for attempt Scott --
a Tim Scott that doesn't appear
on the shelf?
Jonathan: Sure, he would be
Pepsi.
He would be the alternative to
coke and new coke.
The thing is you've got coke,
new coke and Pepsi, how many
other brands of Republicans are
going to be in the race?
Donald Trump was able to eke his
way to the 2016 nomination
because there were as we like to
say fifty-eleven people on the
stage.
If it is Donald Trump, Nikki
Haley, Asa Hutchinson, Tim
Scott, maybe one other person,
maybe he has a chance, the more
people who jump in the race,
less likely it is that anybody
on the stage not numbed -- not
name Donald Trump will win the
nomination.
Great to see -- geoff: Great to
see you both as always.
♪♪