The Coffee Klatch with Robert Reich

This morning I phoned my old friend Alan Simpson, the former Wyoming senator.Alan and I see eye-to-eye on nothing. He’s a conservative Republican, I’m a progressive Democrat. He’s a fiscal hawk, I don’t worry about the national debt. He thinks Biden has gone too far, I don’t think he’s gone far enough.We don’t see eye-to-eye literally, either. He’s 6 foot 7 and I’m 4 feet 11.But here’s the thing: I love the guy.We struck up a friendship during my years as Secretary of Labor. It began at one of those interminable Washington receptions. He introduced himself and began to talk, but the crowd was so noisy -- and he’s so tall -- I couldn’t hear a word. So I stood on a chair, where our heads were about level.We soon discovered we had one big thing in common: our senses of humor. I found him hilarious. Apparently the feeling was mutual.We planned to get together for lunch, but my staff at the Labor Department was against it. “You haven’t had lunch with most Democratic senators. If you have lunch with Simpson they’ll be insulted,” they warned.His staff was against our lunch, too (he later told me). They said it was inappropriate for a senior Republican senator from one of the most conservative states in America to have lunch with the most liberal member of Clinton’s cabinet. “Your constituents in Wyoming will have a fit,” they warned.So we snuck out for lunch. Neither of our staffs knew where we’d gone. It was the start of a beautiful relationship.This morning we talked about our families and traded a few amusing anecdotes, as we usually do. We also talked about what’s happened to American politics. “They hate each other,” he said, of the current crop of Democrats and Republicans in Washington. Simpson is 90 years old now, but his mind is as sharp as ever. He reminded me that we briefly did a television show together on WGBH in Boston, where we discussed the issues of the week — mixing humor and politics. The show never got much of a following but we had a wonderful time. We called it “The Long and the Short of It.” This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe

This week, we’re going to witness two high-stakes games of chicken. 1. The first game will be between Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans over raising the debt ceiling and extending funding the government beyond Thursday. These two issues are really quite different: Funding is the more immediate need because if no agreement is reached by Thursday night, the government will shut down. The debt ceiling doesn’t have to be raised until the Treasury runs out of money to pay the government’s bills, which won’t happen until mid or late October. As I said last week, raising the debt ceiling is about paying for spending that’s already occurred. A higher debt ceiling doesn’t authorize new federal spending; it’s about past spending. Raising it simply allows the government to pay its bills. Failure to raise it by the time the Treasury runs out of money would mean a cataclysmic default by the United States, which has never happened before. On the other hand, funding the government is about future spending, starting Friday. Without new funding authority, the government can’t spend a dime. This will result in a shutdown. We have been through several in recent memory (I was in two of them when I ran a cabinet department, and I can tell you they aren’t pretty). Some Americans don’t get the services they depend on. Government workers don’t get the paychecks they depend on. Oh, and there’s a political cost. Generally speaking, the party that voters blame for causing a shutdown is penalized in the next election. (Remember Newt Gingrich?)So what’s behind this first game of chicken? Republicans don’t want to be seen raising the debt ceiling because they want to run in next year’s midterm elections on “fiscal prudence.” (Ironic note: most of the debt piled up since the debt ceiling was last raised came from Trump and Republican lawmakers). And 99 percent of the public mistakenly believes the debt ceiling is about future spending.Which is exactly why Democrats would rather collapse the two issues together, thereby forcing Republicans into the awkward position of either voting to raise the debt ceiling or causing the government to shut down. The House has already bound the two issues together by passing a bill to fund the government through early December that includes an increase in the debt ceiling (as well as disaster relief).In this game, Senate Democrats are daring Republicans to publicly vote against the combined bill – and thereby cause a shutdown. (If Republicans refuse, the only way to avoid a shutdown is for Nancy Pelosi and House Democrats to quickly pass a new resolution without the debt-ceiling provision -- which Senate Republicans have said they’ll sign.)In the meantime – to increase the pressure -- the Office of Management and Budget has given federal agencies instructions for what to do in case of a shutdown.2. The second high-stakes game of chicken this week is between Democrats in the House: between progressives and so-called “moderates.”House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, you may recall, promised that the two giant bills now moving through Congress would be voted on together in the House – the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that’s already passed the Senate, and the $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” plan containing the rest of Biden’s agenda (which can only get through the Senate as a “reconciliation” bill requiring a bare majority). She promised this because House progressives refused to vote for the infrastructure bill without a simultaneous vote on the larger bill, out of fear that moderates would approve infrastructure but then balk at the rest. Yet to be responsive to House moderates, she promised a vote on infrastructure by September 27. (She has now scheduled the vote for Thursday.)The problem, of course, is she can’t deliver on both promises because the $3.5 trillion Build Back Better plan isn’t ready. Yet if Pelosi follows through and schedules a vote on infrastructure without Build Back Better, progressives are threatening to vote against the infrastructure bill — which could kill the infrastructure bill because Democrats have a small 3-vote lead over Republicans in the House, and it’s unlikely Republicans will vote for the bill.But unless Pelosi schedules a vote on infrastructure today (or very soon), roughly a dozen House moderates are threatening to vote against the bigger Build Back Better bill when it comes up.Oy. Here’s the bottom line: Neither of these games of chicken would be as fraught if Democrats were united. But even though they hold narrow majorities in both the House and Senate, they aren’t united. They’re less unified than Republicans. Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy (Senate and House Republican leaders, respectively) simply snap their fingers, and Republicans get in line. But Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi (the Democratic leaders) snap their fingers and Democrats go their separate ways. Biden snaps his fingers and congressional Democrats politely yawn.Why this asymmetry? I suspect it’s

My first week of writing (and drawing) this letter has been everything I hoped it would be, largely because of you. Thank you for joining me in this experiment (and it is an experiment because I’ve never tried anything like it before). I hope you will find it useful — as well as interesting and occasionally even amusing. It’s no secret the past year has been long and grueling. Although I’ve been luckier than most, I’ve felt the same stresses many of you have felt (including some sleepless nights and moments of acute fear). The former guy is no longer in the Oval Office and the worst of the pandemic seems behind us (hopefully), yet the dark forces of authoritarianism and white supremacy are still very much with us, as are growing inequality and corruption. Obviously, there’s no simple remedy. But surely part of the answer is to grow a community of people committed to spreading the truth and contributing to a better world. Which is why I’m here and presumably why you are.But rather than make assumptions, please tell me about yourself. What brings you here? This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit robertreich.substack.com/subscribe