There is absolutely nothing at stake here for Dems except "giving in" to Mitch McConnell and I can't even believe this is a debate.
On the one hand there's a meteor headed for the US economy; on the other hand this process we've used twice already this year is hard, risky, untested, and also Mitch is acting in bad faith.
There's not even a moral hazard issue here, where using reconciliation would lead to problems down the road. At worst, the next party in full control of Washington would have to use reconciliation to raise the debt limit. Ok. Filibuster probably gone anyway by that point.
So given that there's no meaningful principle (let alone substantive concession) at stake here, you're left with one incredibly lame political concern: mean attacks involving a debt figure. But you're working on a(nother) multi-trillion dollar bill--those ads are baked in!
The most important thing to remember is that nobody cares about any of this crap. So if you're stuck on process or politics or "blame" you're totally missing the point.
This is also a good point. To extent Dems see opportunity in heightening the contradictions here they're playing just as dangerous a game as Rs are--with a lot more to lose!
Kind of wild that the ratings agencies are projecting calm citing the likelihood that Dems will avail themselves of reconciliation while Dems beg off reconciliation by citing the risk of a potential downgrade.
We cannot commence the process of raising the debt limit that would inherently soothe the markets because that might lead to a downgrade. Best to hold out and see what happens.
If anything the market is under-reacting because they think it'll get figured out, this is just posturing, etc. Meanwhile both sides think the other will blink if/when they do sell off. And/but every trader is watching for that dip to buy because it will be raised eventually.
Punchbowl sheds light on the path to raising the debt limit via reconciliation. There was never genuine confusion on this, but good to have this coming from the parl now that it's crunch time. email.punchbowl.news/t/ViewEmail/t/…
Also time to put away vote-a-rama as the excuse du jour. The whole array of counterarguments is just really unconvincing. There is plenty of time to do it unless you run out the clock saying there's no time to do it.
Still pretty wild no enterprising hill journo has done a whip count for a reconciliation debt lift given everything other bill we harass them about, real or theoretical.
Twitter is not a medium for nuance, but the Sinema discourse is particularly reductive. She's either a lightweight who has no idea what she's doing and gets rolled and/or bounced in 2024, or this calculated maverick bit is a boon for her brand back home. Neither are what matters.
The synthesis (and the point, if you're a counter-party--say, the WH) is that she has a very specific theory of the case as it relates to her brand/path/political future, one than leans into her contrarian streak and revels in these clashes. One that is unfalsifiable for 3 years.
It doesn't matter if you think she's a genius, a fool, or the joker incarnate--all that matters is that your agenda is toast without her, and betting it all on her responding in conventional ways to conventional pressure is a profoundly risky proposition.
Provided this doesn't all blow up, this ends with mods net positive (BIF-BTU), Pelosi more or less breaking even by keeping all the balls in the air, and progs escaping with what's left of their dignity in the form of a $3.5T marker.