Debt Ceiling Crisis Averted, House Tea Partiers Express No Regrets

The House lawmakers who brought the nation to the brink of default think they put up a just fight. Uh oh.

Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) and Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.)Pete Marovich/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Rep. Thomas Massie, the Hayek-quoting, trouble-making first-term Republican congressman from northern Kentucky, stood in a circle of reporters in the Capitol basement and shrugged. “Goose egg—we got nothing.” That was his summation of what House Republicans had accomplished, after shutting down the federal government for 15 days, costing $24 billion in economic losses, and bringing the nation to the brink of an unprecedented default.

After the Senate voted 81 to 18 to approve a bill to raise the debt ceiling and fund the federal government, the House followed suit late Wednesday night, with 87 Republicans joining the entire Democratic caucus in support of the measure, one that included none of the original tea party demands to delay or defund Obamacare. In a statement, President Obama expressed his wish that Washington “put the last three weeks behind us.”

Still, Massie had no regrets. “I don’t see any credence to the argument that we would have been better off without the fight,” he said, “because nobody can tell me what we’d have now that we don’t have.”

Among House Republicans on Wednesday night, Massie’s attitude was hardly an outlier.

Asked if the shutdown and debt fight had been worth, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) didn’t blink: “Absolutely, I think it’s worth it! It’s been worth it because what we did is we fought the right fight.” Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) argued that the House’s intransigence was ultimately critical to America’s survival. “For this government to continue as a republican form of democracy, we’ve got to have both houses contribute, not one,” he said before hopping on an elevator.

One reason why some Republican lawmakers aren’t running away from the next battle? They’re not so sure they were the ones responsible for this one. “The House of Representatives didn’t shut the government down—we passed bills to try to deal with the underlying health care problem as well as the underlying debt and deficit problem,” said Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.), when asked for his critique of his leadership’s tactics. “It’s important for a distinction that this was not a decision to shut the government down.”

Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.), who insisted in recent days that Treasury Secretary Jack Lew was deliberately fudging the facts about the debt ceiling, said he never supported a shutdown to begin with, but the administration had decided to jump off the cliff itself. “Would he want that again?” Huelskamp said of the president. “I don’t know.”

“This whole fight was completely preventable,” added Bachmann, who recently told a biblical prophecy radio program that we are living in the End Times. “The problem is the administration said early on they were willing to see the American government go into default so they could have their agenda—that’s what the gambled on.” Republicans, however “are not willing to risk the full faith and credit of the United States.”

The #yolo attitude of the conservative firebrands who helped push the party into the crises of the last two weeks is important because the new budget and debt ceiling framework is just a short-term fix. Congress will have to approve a new continuing budget resolution by mid-January, and another debt ceiling increase before February 7. And some members aren’t optimistic things will improve much by then. “It’s a bad deal,” said Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas). So did he think we’d be back here in this same situation in a few months? Barton didn’t hesitate: “Yes.”

On Wednesday night, old-guard Republicans in the Senate could only shake their heads at the die-hards in the lower chamber. “There’s an old adage: There’s nothing to be learned from the second kick of a mule,” mused Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), shortly after voting in favor of the package. “Maybe there’s been a little bit of education—we’ll see.”

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate