I Was There
In his press conference
yesterday, President Obama added another item to his growing list of
historical misrepresentations about spending and debt ceiling
negotiations.
After claiming that never
“in the history of the United States” had elected officials used the
debt ceiling as political leverage (false),
and after insinuating that it’s somehow unusual to expect presidents to
negotiate over spending bills (absurd), Obama yesterday mixed a false
history of the Clinton-Gingrich shutdowns into his press room lecture.
“[B]ack in the '90s we had
a government shutdown,” he said. “That happened one time, and then
after that, the Republican Party and Mr. Gingrich realized this isn't a
sensible way to do business. You know, we shouldn't engage in
brinksmanship like this, and then they started having a serious
conversation with President Clinton about a whole range of issues, and
they got some things that they wanted. They had to give the Democrats
some things that the Democrats wanted. But it took on, you know, a sense
of normal democratic process."
As one of the principal
negotiators in the 1995-1996 budget showdown between Republicans and
President Clinton, it is clear to me the President has a number of very
important things wrong.
First, there were two
shutdowns, not one, and that was important. In mid-November of 1995, the
government closed for several days after Clinton vetoed our Continuing
Resolution which contained more spending cuts than he was willing to
accept.
The public blamed Republicans for the first shutdown much more than they blamed Clinton. A CNN/Gallup poll
released at the time found that Americans blamed the GOP over the
President by 2-to-1, 49 percent to 26 percent. In part this was because
the press was anti-Republican. But in part it was because we’d made so
clear beforehand that we were willing to close the government if
necessary.
The pressure on us to cave
was enormous. Instead, we refused to give-in, and worked with President
Clinton to pass a very short-term extension of government funding and
increase in the debt ceiling as negotiations continued. A month later,
no compromise had been reached, and despite the media pressure on us, we
allowed the government to close again, this time for three weeks.
Which leads to President
Obama’s second false claim: that it wasn’t until after the shutdowns
that we began a “serious conversation” with President Clinton to advance
our priorities.
This could not be more
mistaken. Clinton and I spoke virtually every day during the shutdowns.
We were constantly negotiating. And more importantly, although the
shutdowns were in some ways a temporary PR setback for Republicans (they
did no lasting damage),
they were critical in convincing the President and the country that we
were serious about doing what said we’d do in 1994--and that we were
willing to be tough to get it done. That was of enormous strategic value
going forward.
President Obama is right
that the shutdowns of 1995 were a pivotal moment which cleared the way
for the success Republicans had afterward. But he’s very wrong about the
reason.
It was after the shutdowns and significantly because of them that we
achieved some of the greatest growth and opportunity for all Americans
in a generation.
In 1996, we passed welfare
reform, and in the next several years two out of every three Americans
on welfare either went to work or went to school.
The House Republican majority was reelected for the first time since 1928.
We passed four consecutive balanced budgets, the only ones in our lifetimes.
We cut taxes for the first time in 17 years, including the largest capital gains tax cut in American history.
These big victories very well might not have happened if not for the shutdowns in 1995-1996.
The policy changes helped
power an economic boom so big that it produced a $5 trillion turnaround
in the fiscal outlook of the United States between January 1995 and
January 1999, from a $2.7 trillion deficit over ten years to a $2.3
trillion surplus. The nation’s ten-year debt outlook went from 56
percent of GDP to just 12 percent.
What President Obama calls
“brinksmanship” and not a “sensible way to do business” may be one of
the most successful negotiations ever for Americans.
Republicans today face a
very similar challenge to the one we faced in 1995, and with similar
pressure to cave. Yet just as in 1995, they are proving to the President
that he must take the Congress seriously.
Americans should hope Obama learns that lesson as well as President Clinton did, and with such strong results.
Your Friend,
Newt
P.S. Callista's new children's book, Yankee Doodle Dandy,
is now available! Join Ellis the Elephant as he discovers the American
Revolution and how America became a free and independent nation in the
third installment of this New York Times bestselling series. Order now>>
|
No comments:
Post a Comment