Nancy Pelosi is talking about legislation to end shutdowns, the thrust of it being that spending levels would automatically continue at present levels during any period when appropriations were not made. This articlesuggests that’s not such a good idea, and the author (Ian Milhiser) makes a good case. His essential argument is that such a mechanism would make it easier for Republicans to refuse to vote on new appropriations, as the immediate political cost would be negligible, while continued intransigence would amount to a slow defunding of vital programs due to inflation.
It’s a helpful reminder that before suggesting any type of corrective legislation, it’s a good idea to put yourself in the shoes of your opponents and try to figure out how they would or could use it to cause havoc.
I’m not sure the courts would allow it, but Milhiser suggests the following:
One possibility is a law providing that, for each week that Congress fails to pass appropriations, marginal tax rates on Americans earning more than a million dollars a year will automatically increase by one percent. That way, a powerful Republican constituency will have a major incentive to end the shutdown, and Republican lawmakers will be pushed into a weaker and weaker bargaining position the longer the shutdown continues.
As he points out, since Republicans are the problem, the solution has to target Republicans where it hurts, so they will have an incentive to act responsibly. On the same subject, I agree somewhat with the writer here, who says the Republicans may have learned their lesson, but the lesson isn’t that they shouldn’t shut down the government, it’s that they should do it in a way that benefits them. The fact that some of them are suggesting we look at an automatic continuing resolution merely means they see the possibility of abusing it in the way Milhiser discusses.
Post a Comment