Republican leaders in Congress haven't done very well negotiating on the budget, and now a new threat looms: a showdown in the fall, before Election Day, that could force Republicans to choose between more spending and higher taxes or the risk of a government shutdown. 

That increasingly looks to be the Democratic strategy, pushed quietly by the White House and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Senate Democrats are refusing to complete individual spending bills, much less an overall budget, and the federal government will run out of money at the end of the fiscal year on September 30.

The reasonable fear among the smarter Republicans is that President Obama and Mr. Reid want a shutdown showdown. If the GOP bends, Democrats will get more spending and demoralize GOP voters. If House Republicans resist, Mr. Obama will blame the prospect of a shutdown on an unpopular Congress. Mitt Romney could be forced into a tough political spot. 

It makes sense to try to avoid this ambush, which is what GOP Senators Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin have been proposing behind the scenes. They want the GOP House to pass a continuing spending resolution budget, or CR, that would fund the government into 2013. The funding would be at the level of the $1.047 trillion spending cap for 2013 that was part of last year's debt-limit agreement. 

"This would take a government shutdown off the table until next year," Senator Johnson says. "The alternative is to leave taxpayers on the hook for more borrowing and debt." He's right to be concerned. Democratic Budget Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota has already suggested $14 billion of extra spending this year as an opening bid. 

If House Republicans pass such a CR before they leave for summer recess in August, they'll be on record early as trying to avoid a shutdown. Republicans could then speak as one that they want to avoid such an impasse, and Mr. Reid's shutdown gambit would be exposed. The election debate could then turn to the larger issues of economic policy, rather than a brawl over inside-the-Beltway process that is sure to anger voters. 

This strategy is supported by some Members of the leadership, but so far neither House Speaker John Boehner nor the Senate leadership is on board. Their concern is that a CR would leave unresolved both the tax cliff and steep defense sequester scheduled for the start of next year. That's true, but those issues appear hopelessly stalemated until after the election at least, and maybe until next year. 

Another concern is that some conservatives may object to CR spending that is above the $1.029 trillion target in Budget Chairman Paul Ryan's House budget. But the Ryan level is unattainable in the Senate, and Mr. DeMint warns that failure to pass the CR soon only increases the odds of even higher spending. 

Mr. Boehner would also rather not cross his Appropriators, whose power flows from allocating money in individual or omnibus spending bills. GOP conservatives fear that the alternative to the CR is for Mr. Boehner to negotiate a back room pre-eIection budget agreement with the White House and Mr. Reid. Uh oh. We've seen that movie before: The President claims in public to want nothing more than bipartisan cooperation, even as he refuses any compromise in private and then blames Republicans for the breakdown in talks.

If nothing else, Republicans ought to be able to agree to pass a CR through Election Day. That would at least put the onus on Senate Democrats to act. Mr. Reid and his party may protest, but they'll have a hard time arguing against spending levels they agreed to last year. 

If Mr. Boehner and Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell have a better budget strategy, we're eager to hear it. Otherwise, they should move to put the shutdown threat out of election range and get on with the economic debate that really matters.

View original article