- Jan 2010
Reid: Obama Will Call House Back From Recess If Necessary Over Shutdown Fight
(snip ... )
Speaking for his caucus at a Friday press conference, Reid categorically rejected the idea disaster aid should be offset. After the Senate rejected that proposal on a bipartisan basis, Reid urged Boehner to sit down with himself, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to review his offer, in the hope of avoiding a government shutdown. And he said if House Republicans continue intransigently to demand that the Senate swallow their bill, President Obama will call the House back into session from its week-long recess.
"The President of course will do that if necessary, and I don't think that will be necessary," Reid said in response to TPM's question. "I would have to think that the vote Monday -- that all eyes will be upon them, including the Speaker's and Leader Cantor.... They were trolling for votes for maybe more than 24 hours, to try to get enough votes to satisfy the Tea Party."
TPM has a request for comment in to the White House and will post their response if and when it comes.
Reid and the Democrats have calculated that the public understands which party's the reasonable party, and which one's prone to picking ideological fights with far-reaching consequences. House Republicans have skipped town and left Senate Democrats holding the ball with a single piece of legislation that funds the government, but only if Democrats accept cuts to a successful manufacturing program as the cost of offsetting disaster relief.
But there are plenty of other options, if Republicans are willing to sit down and negotiate. Democrats' only bright line in those negotiations is to avoid a precedent that disaster funds must be offset with cuts to federal programs -- particularly successful and popular ones.
Asked if any potential offsets would satisfy him, Reid said, bluntly, "No."
more: Reid: Obama Will Call House Back From Recess If Necessary Over Shutdown Fight | TPMDC
Reid and the Democrats may be right about the public being wise to who is compromising, and who is obstructing for ideological purposes. But I think they may be underestimating exactly how sick the public is of all these games of chickens. At some point, even if the public thinks the other guy is responsible for the crap, both parties engaged in it are going to be blamed, regardless of fault.
I think we might be past that point.