John B. Gilmour, Ph.D. – Professor of Government and Public Policy, College of William & Mary

Dear Colleagues:

This week’s “Friday Lunch” program will take advantage of Zoom to hear from a leading scholar about recent and likely future dramatic events in our nation’s capital – or Capitol.

If you had asked me on Saturday morning, September 30, I would have said a government shutdown was extremely likely. At that point the only alternative was for the House to pass, by Suspension of the Rules, a Continuing Resolution that would have to be far from the House Republicans’ preferences not just because the Senate and President would have to sign on but, even more, because passage under Suspension requires 2/3 of the House, which mathematically had to mean just under a third of the House Democrats. So this had to be a straight, clear sell-out of the conservative Republican position, up front, which seemed a really good way for the Speaker of the House to lose his job. And Speaker McCarthy wouldn’t do that; he had long seemed like someone who would do almost anything for the job. In fact, in order to win the post in January he had done the one thing that even people who saw him as incredibly ambitious thought he wouldn’t do: allow a single member to move to vacate his post.

So, of course, he did the barely imaginable on that Saturday, a shutdown was avoided for the next 45 days, and then he lost his Speakership. By the time we meet for “Friday Lunch” on Friday the 13th there may be new developments worth discussing on the Speaker front. We’ll surely talk about whatever the heck happens during the week. But we also will be looking forward to November 17, when it seems exceedingly likely that we will be looking at another shutdown threat, and sacrificing a Speaker for a temporary fix will no longer be an option.

How did we get here, and what is “here” anyway? “Here” is the latest in a long line of clashes that make the United States look like a banana republic. Our “separation of powers” system encourages failure to agree. That is not so harmful for normal legislation, because it just means policy is not changed and so perhaps problems not addressed. But in the case of annual appropriations or debt ceiling showdowns, agreement is vital because the consequences of doing nothing would be severe.

Unfortunately that threat may be and often has been seen as an opportunity by factions that feel they can force the other players to agree with them by threatening to make the terrible come true. Therefore there is a long history of budgetary hostage-taking, which so far has had only unpleasant but not devastating consequences. I’ve written about some of it in my own work. It happens partly because it works a bit sometimes, as it did for House Republicans who got President Obama to agree to major spending restraints in 2011. It also happens because politicians play to their bases figuring they can concede later. Last but not least, it happens because of calculating mistakes: each side thinks the other will give in.

This year the showdown has been three-cornered: a Republican House, Democratic president, and a Senate which is nominally controlled by the Democrats and is closer to the president’s preferences but subject to a Republican filibuster. It is made even more difficult than usual by the current divisions within House Republicans, with the rightest-wing factions blocking legislation in order to coerce their own party leaders. We’re looking at veto politics, the politics of House/Senate conflict, and disruption within each chamber of Congress.

Can any sense be made of all this? Maybe. It’s hard because what happens ultimately depends on individuals whose behavior can’t be explained just by the balance of other powers in the conflict. But we do know what kinds of other pressures tend to shape budgetary conflicts, and we know a lot about common dynamics in those fights.

Much of what I know I’ve learned from John Gilmour, one of the most incisive students of bargaining within Congress and between Congress and the president. In a widely praised book, Strategic Disagreement, John explained why congressional parties often choose not to find agreement even if there is some policy which each would prefer to the status quo. In an article I assign in my presidency class, John explains how presidential vetoes can be a product of calculations both by presidents and leaders of Congress. Recently I called John to help me think through what I should tell my Congress class about the current mess. To my delight, he agreed to discuss it with the Friday Lunch group as well, joining us by Zoom.

Those of us who wish will meet in person in Mather House Room 100. I look forward to the conversation with one of my favorite scholars and people.

Of course if somehow by Friday a relatively moderate Republican has been elected Speaker with Democratic votes, the discussion might change a bit. But that seems really unlikely to me, and if it does happen we’ll certainly have plenty to talk about…

In-Person and Virtual Attendance

This Friday’s meeting has been moved from the Kelvin Smith Library to Mather House 100. Mather House is the building in between the Thwing Center and the Church of the Covenant. The main entrance faces east, towards the Church.

We will also meet in Mather House on Oct 20.

We continue also to offer the meetings on Zoom. We do require pre-registering so as to avoid “zoom-bombing.” The pre-registration link is posted below.

The discussion begins at 12:30 p.m., but the room should be open no later than Noon. We try to have beverages and refreshments set up soon after that. Participants should be able to sign on to Zoom also by Noon. But please remember not much will be happening online until the talk begins at 12:30 pm. You do not need to show identification to enter Mather House, but I don’t understand why anyone would walk around without any, anyway.

Zoom participants should speak up when asked for questions or comments, or submit thoughts through Zoom’s chat function. Please keep yourself muted until you are choosing to speak.

Each week we will send out this newsletter with information about the topic. It will also include a link to register (for free) for the discussion. When you register, you will automatically receive from the Zoom system the link to join the meeting. If you do not get the newsletter, you should also be able to get the information each Monday by checking http://fridaylunch.case.edu Then if you choose you can use the contact form on that website to request the registration link.

This week’s Zoom link for registration is:

https://cwru.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJMsde6uqjgqGdxZXgB_CD9wqeyDPWOka0g2

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.

Please also e-mail padg@case.edu if you have questions about arrangements or any suggestions. Or call at 216 368-2426 and we’ll try to get back to you. We are very pleased to be partnering this semester with the Siegal Lifelong Learning Program to share information about the discussions.

Best wishes for safety and security for you and yours,

Joe White
Luxenberg Family Professor of Public Policy and Director, Center for Policy Studies

About Our Guest

John B. Gilmour received an A.B. degree from Oberlin College, and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of California at Berkeley. Professor Gilmour has taught in the Department of Government at the College of William & Mary since 1995 and has served as the Director of the Public Policy Program. He teaches a variety of courses in American politics and public policy. His research interests center on the United States Congress, and bargaining between Congress and the President. Recent research centers on performance assessment and performance budgeting in the executive branch. He has written two books, Strategic Disagreement: Stalemate in American Politics (U Pittsburgh Press, 1995) and Reconcilable Differences? Congress, the Budget Process, and the Deficit (U California Press, 1990), as well as articles in the American Journal of Political Science, the Journal of Politics, Public Administration Review, Presidential Studies Quarterly and Legislative Studies Quarterly. Some of his other work has studied term limits and the budgetary maneuvers when governments sell leases on public assets, such as Chicago parking meters and the Indiana Toll Road.

Schedule of Friday Lunch Upcoming Topics and Speakers:

October 20: One Semester Away from Crisis: Small Colleges and American Higher Education. With Tom Bogart, Ph.D., Visiting Professor and Chair, Department of Economics. Alternate Room: Mather House 100

October 27: Storefronts, Communities, and the Changing World of Retail. With Michael Goldberg, Associate Professor of Design and Innovation; Executive Director and Associate Vice President, Veale Institute for Entrepreneurship.

November 3: Dobbs and Doctors. With David N. Hackney MD, Division Director, Maternal Fetal Medicine, University Hospitals of Cleveland.

November 10: Who’s Legally Responsible When “Self-Driving” Cars Go “Eyes Off?” With Cassandra Burke Robertson, JD, John Deaver Drinko – BakerHostetler Professor of Law.

November 17: Axios Cleveland and the Future of Local Media. With Sam Allard, reporter for Axios Cleveland.

November 24: Thanksgiving Break

December 1: Civil-Military Relations in Egypt. With Dina Rashed, Ph.D., Associate Dean of the College for Academic Affairs, University of Chicago.

December 8: To Be Determined.