The Morning Plum: John Boehner doesn’t really want to `negotiate’ with Obama

[ProSense]

The Morning Plum: John Boehner doesn’t really want to `negotiate’ with Obama

By Greg Sargent

With the government shutdown dragging into Week Two, and the debt limit deadline creeping closer, Republicans continue to insist the cause of our current governing crisis is that Obama and Democrats refuse to negotiate with them. On ABC News yesterday, John Boehner repeated this talking point again and again.

Yet in the process, Boehner revealed what this invitation to “negotiate” really means. He implicitly confirmed Republicans will only negotiate in a context in which Republicans can employ the looming threat of disaster for the country as a way to unilaterally increase their leverage, and will not negotiate without being granted this leverage. Here’s the key exchange, with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos:

STEPHANOPOULOS: The Democrats, including Senate Democrat Harry Reid, has said he’s more than willing to have a conference, more than willing to have a negotiation, but not under the threat of a government shutdown, not under the threat of a default.

BOEHNER: So it’s my way or the highway. That’s what he’s saying. Complete surrender and then we’ll talk to you.

This is an extremely important and revealing moment. Boehner is explicitly saying that the Democrats’ refusal to negotiate in a context where the threat of widespread harm to the country gives Republicans leverage – and their insistence on negotiating outside this context — represents a demand for ”complete surrender” by Republicans, and hence is a non-starter. But in this scenario, Republicans would not be giving up anything, other than the very leverage Republicans presume the threat of widespread harm to the country grants them. For Republicans, agreeing to negotiate without this unilateral leverage would itself be surrender!

Indeed, later in the interview, Boehner agreed not raising the debt limit would mean widespread economic damage:

STEPHANOPOULOS: The Treasury Department put out a report just the other day, where they said it would be unprecedented and catastrophic, that would be the impact of failing to pass a debt limit. They’re going to say, credit markets could freeze. The value of the dollar could plummet. U.S. interest rates could skyrocket. The negative spillovers could reverberate around the world, and there might be a financial crisis and recession that could echo the events of 2008 or worse. Do you agree with that assessment?

BOEHNER: I do.

Stephanopoulos also asked Boehner what concessions Republicans would be willing to make in this “negotiation” he’s requesting. Boehner couldn’t name any...A lot of folks have been willing to accept Boehner’s demand for “negotiations” at face value. But let’s be clear on what he is really asking for here. Boehner is actually ruling out any negotiations in which Republicans don’t enjoy the leverage that the threat of a massive economic meltdown confers upon them. And he’s also saying Republicans will make no concessions of their own in them.

- more -

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/10/07/the-morning-plum-john-boehner-doesnt-really-want-to-negotiate-with-obama/

Boehner Threatens US Credit Default
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023794990

President Obama slams Republicans: "I won't pay a ransom in exchange for reopening the government"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023789988

[stevenleser]

1. That is his public position. Privately, he desperately wants out of this.

This is not his chosen course of action, it was forced on him. The problem for him is that he is speaker. It's his job to stand up to the crazies in his party and he is not up to it.

Dick Armey and I talk about this here---> http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lesersense/2013/10/06/all-about-the-shutdown-with-dick-armey-and-bob-cusack#.UlIPfo57bOQ.blogger

[DCBob]

2. Yes, I agree with this. He trying to find a way out without looking like a complete loser.

So far there doesnt appear to be one.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. He should just take the hit

He's going to at some point anyway and, really, who do the teabaggers have waiting in the wings for his job?

[stevenleser]

8. They have Cantor, who, well, you should listen to my show... nt

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. I think I will. Thanks!

n/t

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. Pardon me if I'm mistaken (and I haven't had a chance to listen to the interview)

but didn't Dick Armey help organize the Tea Party in the first place? Did he disavow them?

[stevenleser]

5. Yes to your first question, unclear as to the second. He's no longer with FreedomWorks

it seems like there was some sort of major disagreement that precipitated his leaving. From what I could gather, he disagrees with some things and agrees with others.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

9. Differences in ideology? Tactics?

The Tea Party people- for all their supposed reverence of all things Constitutional- don't have much of an understanding of how government is supposed to function, which is why a lot of long-serving Republicans don't believe in pulling their stunts (i.e. government shutdowns, threatening default) but, in the end, they don't seem to have much of a say and/or a will to make things go differently. I think we're basically doomed unless they get a spine and stop feeding the tea trolls.

[ProSense]

4. Regardless of his desperation, he screwed up.

"This is not his chosen course of action, it was forced on him. The problem for him is that he is speaker. It's his job to stand up to the crazies in his party and he is not up to it. "

As speaker, he should have led, and not be "forced" into threaten to destroy the U.S. economy.

A failure for the ages (Boehner)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023758956

[stevenleser]

6. No disagreement there. He has failed utterly as Speaker. nt

[ProSense]

11. Kick! n/t