Washington Update from a DC Insider

[Mike McKenna is a long-time analyst/advisor/polling professional in Washington, DC. Also a former Trump staffer, he currently writes op/eds for the Washington Times. He sends out comprehensive state-of-play reports to a select email distribution, and allows me to share them with paid subscribers here. This is his report for March.]

From:  Michael McKenna

Date:   May 15, 2023

Re:      May 2023 Monthly note

Debt Limit

           Everyone seems to care about the debt limit and how that story will conclude, so let’s start with that.  If the deal is struck right after I get this out, please adjust the verb tenses accordingly.

           As this goes to press, the House Republicans are still the only ones who have written down and passed legislation that increases the debt limit.  That means that their approach is framing the conversation, and it has been since they passed that legislation.

           Consequently, the final deal will reflect the framework in the House legislation – some clawback of unspent funds, a rebaselining of the budget (perhaps to FY2022 levels, perhaps not), and then some sort of cap (1% a year?  2% a year?) in the nominal growth of federal spending (both defense and non-defense).  Anticipate a short string; the limit will be raised just enough to ensure that we will back here in 18-24 months.

           Among other things, that means that the 2024 election will be, at least in part, a contest over federal spending, and the results of the election will be dispositive both to the debt limit and President Trump’s tax legislation (the TCJA).

The only questions that remain open as this is written is what are the duration and configuration of the spending caps and what is the runway on the debt limit.  In short, there’s a deal out there, and it’s not a particularly complicated one.  But it could take anywhere from 10 minutes to ten days to put a bow on it.

The vision thing

The 2024 campaign for president started in earnest a few weeks ago, as former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo decided not to run, Senator Tim Scott launched an exploratory committee to run, and President Trump went negative on Governor DeSantis, who is not yet running.

For whatever reason, Team Trump decided that the top of the campaign would be an optimal moment to launch an attack on Mr. DeSantis for having once had the temerity to question the underlying economic assumptions about Social Security, Medicare, and the (current) retirement age.  For those who may have lost the thread, Medicare is projected to be insolvent in five years; Social Security might make it to 2033 before becoming insolvent.