Today: The Big Pay-Go Show Down In The House

Yesterday I spent hours on the phone talking with members of Congress about Pelosi's Rules Package vote today. That's because her damned Pay-Go provision is part of it. Many of the members I spoke with DID NOT KNOW THERE IS A VOTE AND DO NOT KNOW WHAT PAY-GO IS. By noon I was so depressed I wanted to drown myself. They're just going to do whatever Hoyer and Clyburn tell them to do-- which will absoluetly kill any chance of a progressive agenda in this Congress. Kim Schrier, a physician, is a freshman from Washington's 8th district and is busy being sworn in today. Last night she got back to me with a statement about Pay-Go that threw me for a loop. "Pay Go," she wrote, "brings back fiscally responsible governance and ends the draconian practice of forcing cuts to vital programs to pay for others. It allows new funding sources to keep government working for the American People." I suspect that's what Hoyer and the leadership team are telling members of Congress, especially freshmen, what Pay-Go is. Am I getting ahead of myself here? I'll come back in a minute. Let me turn to my amigo, David Dayen at The Intercept, for a brief explanation-- yesterday-- about this controversy.

He wrote that progressives are pressuring against it-- I haven;'t found any other than Alexandria Ocasio and Ro Khanna-- "the House rules package for the 116th Congress will include a pay-as-you-go provision, requiring all new spending to be offset with either budget cuts or tax increases, a conservative policy aimed at tying the hands of government... Pelosi ran into resistance from progressives, who believe that the rule would make it more difficult for Democrats to pass a host of liberal agenda items, from 'Medicare for All' to a Green New Deal to tuition-free public college. Critics also argue that pay-go creates an unlevel playing field, where Republicans get to blow giant holes in the tax code, as they did with the 2017 tax cuts, while Democrats must pay fealty to the deficit.

The new rule establishes a point of order against any bill that increases the deficit within a ten-year budget window, based on figures from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The House could attach an “emergency” designation to legislation to get around the paygo rule: Congress did this in 2009 to pass the economic stimulus package under President Obama. The point of order could be waived by a majority vote of the House. But this gives the Democratic leadership another lever of control on what legislation can advance, as their assent would be critical to exempting bills from the paygo rule. And members of Congress tend to resist voting to waive the rule, as they worry it creates ready-made attack ads.

There is also a Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act, passed in 2010 under pressure from Blue Dog Democrats, which allows the president to enforce across-the-board cuts if Congress violates pay-go. But the prospect of a president implementing such an unpopular policy is remote. So the House rule looms large by constraining new spending at its source.

Liberals, of course, have plenty of ideas for how to raise revenue. The Trump tax cuts alone offer nearly $3 trillion in potential offsets simply by restoring corporate tax rates, “pass-through” rules on individuals, and inheritance taxes. But the pay-go rule forces Democrats to propose tax increases that Republicans gleefully broadcast. Meanwhile, Republicans, unconcerned with deficits, get to play Santa Claus, freed from having to match tax cuts with anything unappealing.

...At least one Congressional power broker wants progressive Democrats to fight the rules package. “In order for #PayGo to go into effect, it needs to pass the House,” wrote Bernie Sanders advisor Warren Gunnels on Twitter Tuesday night. “If some 18 Dems vote no, it fails. The vote will take place on Thursday. Will enough progressives have the courage to vote no on the first roadblock to #MedicareForAll, #GreenNewDeal & #CollegeForAll? Let’s see.”

The co-chairs of the CPC, Mark Pocan and Pramila Jayapal, look to be trying to tamp down the concern over Pelosi's attempt to ramrod Pay-Go through. They used a statement yesterday, which isn't that different from what I've been hearing from other liberals: "We have been concerned about PAYGO for months, and have had numerous conversations with Rules Chairman Jim McGovern and House leadership about these concerns. We all agree that the real problem with PAYGO exists in the statute that requires it. That is why we will reintroducing legislation in the 116th Congress to end PAYGO. In the meantime Chairman McGovern and House Leadership have committed to us that PAYGO will not be an impediment to advancing key progressive priorities in the 116th Congress. With the assurances that PAYGO can be waived, we do plan to vote for the House rules package and proceed with the legislation to fix the statute." I have tremendous trust in Pramila Jayapal's truthfulness and political instincts. But... Hoyer, Clyburn and Pelosi? Don't make me laugh. Besides, how is a satisfactory PAYGO legislative fix going to get through a wall of Republicans, Blue Dogs and New Dems? And then make it through McConnell's Senate and be signed by the always cooperative Señor Trumpanzee? NO WAY! Voting for a bad rule with the idea of "fixing" it down the road under these political realities, is... well, I won't characterize what I think it is. But, of late, there have been too many New Dems admitted to the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Former co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and incoming chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), told us that he'll "continue to state that pay-go is an unnecessary and misguided policy because it can stifle smart investments that are needed to better our nation and help families. With trillions in tax giveaways to the wealthy and corporations, Republicans are the ones who ushered in a new era of fiscal recklessness-- not Democrats. With the Trump Administration pushing dangerous policies, it is important not to tie our hands while governing. I’m confident our leadership understands these issues and will work toward ensuring pay-go does not impede progress on the policy solutions Americans have demanded." I'd interpret that to mean that today he'll be holding his nose and voting for it.

Tim Ryan (D-OH), often an unabashed Pelosi critic, told the Morning Joe crew yesterday that overall, he's backing Pelosi's efforts. "I don’t think anyone at any point questioned her ability to negotiate, for her to be in rooms like the one she’s going to be in today, like the one she was in last week, and be as effective as anybody else in our caucus or in our party." But that didn't stop him from announcing he's opposing PayGo. "Critical investments in education, infrastructure, and health care should not be held hostage to budgetary constraints that Republicans have never respected."

Saikat is Alexandria Ocasio's chief of staff