The Debt Ceiling Deal Shows Why We Need to Re-Elect Joe Biden

When Joe Biden was deciding whether to run for President in 2019, I believe he concluded that the country needed a President who could break the grip of Trumpism. He knew that impeachment, or even removal from office, would not exorcize the evil of authoritarianism that Trumpism represented, and could even strengthen it by turning the leadership over to an equally evil but less obnoxious commander.

He believed that the only permanent solution was an overwhelming electoral defeat for The Donald. The country needed to rise up and loudly say “No.”

And he believed that his 40+ years in the Senate, both as a Senator and as President of the Senate as Vice President, offered the best hope of making that happen. (Full disclosure: As an undergrad at the University of Delaware in 1972, I had a miniscule role in handing out literature for a 29 year old upstart, Joe Biden, who had no chance of defeating an incumbent Senator. But he did.)

I believe Joe Biden came into office with one overarching goal — to bury, as deeply as possible, the Trumpist approach to governing, which relied on bullying, lies and a disdain for institutions.

He believed that, at this point in our history, the process of governing was more important than the substantive outcome.

Although he won in 2020, truth be told, he did not get that overwhelming victory that the country needed. Were it not for Covid, he may very well have lost.

Biden has spent the first three years of his administration attempting to pour a cement sarcophagus around Trumpism by demonstrating that rational disagreement, respectful negotiations and honest compromise would bring America to the best solutions to our problems. The process, not the answers, would bury Trumpism.

He has had some remarkable successes. He guided the country out of the Covid recession, led the movement to a long-delayed and badly needed infrastructure bill, began curing supply chain problems with the chips legislation and pulled together a worldwide coalition to oppose the Russian invasion of Ukraine without committing American or NATO troops to the fight.

This year he faced a recalcitrant Republican majority in the House that used a threat of a worldwide depression to try to gain political advantages in the upcoming election. The outcome of that negotiation, which should become law this week, shows how quiet, behind the scenes discussion, debate and compromise can solve seemingly intractable issues. Can you imagine how The Donald, if he were in office and facing a small, determined progressive majority in the House, would have handled this debt ceiling debate?

I believe that Biden fully understands that his age will be a problem in the 2024 election, but that he is convinced that he remains that best Democratic candidate capable of putting the final nails in the coffin of authoritarian Trumpism. I agree.

And, to the Progressive caucus who may, in part, oppose this legislation, or even Biden’s nomination, please look (as Joe has said), not at the Almighty but at the alternative.

Biden started by saying he would not negotiate (i.e. compromise) the debt ceiling but that he would debate and compromise budget priorities. When the House finally passed a highly regressive and dangerous set of demands as a part of its debt ceiling bill, Biden seized an opportunity.

He had two choices: (1) insist on a debt ceiling increase while promising to negotiate the budget later or (2) dealing with them together. Had he chosen the first, he likely could have forced that debt ceiling increase just because of the universally acknowledged devastating consequences of default. But then he would have faced budget negotiations in which Speaker McCarthy had the upper hand.

McCarthy’s caucus would be in revolt over the debt ceiling increase and he would, correctly, tell Biden that he could not get the votes for a budget without meeting almost all of the demand in their original debt ceiling bill. Like it or not, everyone needs 218 House votes to have a budget, and they would not be there without draconian cuts in climate change incentives, Medicaid eligibility, veterans benefits and more.

In other words, McCarthy thought he had the leverage by tying together the debt ceiling and ultra-right budget priorities, but in fact, Biden showed that the House position was untenable and had to be changed. As McCarthy looked at the reality of being responsible for an international economic crisis riveling the 1930s, he was forced to compromise on his proposed budget cuts.

Progressives would have gotten a much worse deal were Biden not President, leading the negotiations.

I wish Biden could have gotten some increases in taxation of the wealthiest among us as a part of this deal, but even without that, the compromise is worthy of support. Had Biden insisted on tax increases he likely would have had to give in to more of the House proposals.

Live to fight another day. This deal shows that Biden is our best hope of slamming shut the door on Trumpism and moving the nation forward.