Hendrik Hertzberg, Ryan Lizza, and John Cassidy on the aftermath of the Republican defeat.

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Political Scene | The New Yorker

Episode: Hendrik Hertzberg, Ryan Lizza, and John Cassidy on the Aftermath of the Republican Defeat
Date: October 18, 2013
Host: Amelia Lester (for Dorothy Wickenden)
Guests: Hendrik Hertzberg, Ryan Lizza, John Cassidy

---

Overview

This episode of The Political Scene discusses the immediate aftermath of the 2013 federal government shutdown and debt ceiling crisis. Amelia Lester is joined by New Yorker staff writers Hendrik Hertzberg, Ryan Lizza, and John Cassidy to unpack the political dynamics, winner/loser narratives, Republican party strategy, the Obama administration’s handling, and the implications for future budget and debt negotiations in Congress. The conversation gives particular insight into the structural issues of American politics, the economic fallout, and the evolving identity of the Republican Party.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Government Shutdown Aftermath and the ‘No Winners’ Perspective

Timestamps: 01:14–03:59

• Obama’s Position: Emphasis on moving away from “governing by crisis.”

  “We've got to get out of the habit of governing by crisis.” (Obama, quoted by John Cassidy, 01:36)

• No Real Winners: All panelists agree the country and government were harmed, even if the Republicans “lost” more clearly.
  • International reputation and U.S. credit were negatively affected.
  • “Winning and losing is often relative. If you score minus 5, you do a little better than someone who scores minus 20. But... the country has been damaged...” — Hendrik Hertzberg (02:10)
• Economic Impact: Estimated loss of 0.5% GDP growth in the next quarter and significant, if temporary, costs from government closure.

2. Did the Crisis Change Washington Politics?

Timestamps: 03:59–05:27

• Republican ‘Fever’ Not Broken:
  • Skepticism about the idea that Republicans will avoid such brinkmanship in the future.
  • “The analysis... that Obama can somehow break the fever of the Republican Party... just misses the structural issues.” — Ryan Lizza (03:26)
  • U.S. political structure makes oppositional politics entrenched and hard to shift.
• American System at Fault:

  “It just doesn't work very well. The duty of an opposition is to oppose... Our system can't really accommodate that.” — Hendrik Hertzberg (04:24)

• Violation of Norms: Republicans’ tactics were unprecedented and breached traditional norms, described as “thoroughly unpleasant jerks.” — Hertzberg (05:18)

3. Obama’s Performance and Market Reaction

Timestamps: 05:27–07:05

• Obama stood firm and is credited for this approach:
  • Despite constant criticism, he “finally did it here and... he won” — John Cassidy (05:27)
  • “He has established a principle here that, you know, he’s not going to give in on issues like the debt ceiling.” (05:27)
• Markets, though jittery, never panicked — seen as Washington theater by economic actors.
• U.S. reputation took a hit, but serious financial crisis was avoided.

4. Republican Humiliation and Internal Dynamics

Timestamps: 07:05–09:22

• Republicans lost:
  “It is a humiliation for the Republican Party. There's no doubt about that.” — John Cassidy (07:19)
  • Minimal concessions won: only a minor tightening of ACA eligibility, which arguably strengthened the law.
• Tea Party/Protest Faction:
  • Some on the right frame the shutdown as proof of standing up to both Obama and the GOP establishment, perpetuating internal party strife.
  • “We’ve got a protest party within the Republican Party. This is not a party which is interested in government.” — Cassidy (08:13)
• Ongoing Peril: Continuous crisis is likely; underlying divisions remain.

5. Boehner’s Leadership and GOP Future

Timestamps: 09:44–11:33

• John Boehner: Contrary to fears, Boehner’s speakership seemed secure as he received reluctant right-wing support.
  • “He leaned far enough to the right... there's not going to be a challenge there.” — John Cassidy (09:53)
• Presidential Field: The Tea Party has redefined the party’s national image, eclipsing establishment calls for moderation.
  • Notable quip: “Can Cruz run for president because he was born in Canada? ... It’s not like he’s Kenyan or anything.” (10:36)

6. Fractures Between GOP Base and Business Interests

Timestamps: 11:33–12:13

• Traditional GOP backers (business/corporations) are alarmed by the extreme approach of Tea Party Republicans — a notable split from historic party unity.

7. The Problem of Republican Moderates

Timestamps: 12:00–13:35

• The “economic basis” for moderate GOP politics still exists, but the “political basis seems to have disappeared.”
• Candidates seeking national office must avoid moderation to survive primaries — see Marco Rubio’s immigration efforts vs. Ted Cruz’s intransigence as case studies.
• “Anyone who opposed this strategy will pay a price for it.” — Ryan Lizza (12:13)

8. Prospects for Future Negotiations

Timestamps: 13:35–16:59

• Budget Deadlock to Continue:
  • The area of agreement between Democrats and Republicans remains slim.
  • “I don't really see the contours of a deal here.” — Ryan Lizza (13:52)
  • Sequester likely to remain, enforcing continued austerity.
• Deficit Discussion:
  • The U.S. deficit fell rapidly (from 10% to 3% of GDP), but austerity persists.
  • More stimulus is needed, not more cuts; the country risks tepid growth due to political paralysis.
  • “We’ve already had quite a lot of austerity. We should be focusing on growing the economy now, but there doesn’t seem to be any chance of switching to that.” — John Cassidy (15:03)
  • “Isn't the implication... that the problem with the deficit is that the deficit has to be bigger?... No politician dares say that.” — Hendrik Hertzberg (15:49)
  • “Just to repeat, we’ve had this historic fall in the deficit from 10% to 3% of GDP. I mean, I really can’t remember the last time that happened.” — John Cassidy (16:59)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the systemic issues:
  “It just doesn't work very well. The duty of an opposition is to oppose... Our system can't really accommodate that.” — Hendrik Hertzberg (04:24)
• On Republican tactics:
  “[They] were violating custom. They were violating tradition. They were thoroughly unpleasant jerks.” — Hendrik Hertzberg (05:18)
• On the scale of the GOP defeat:
  “It is a humiliation for the Republican party. There’s no doubt about that.” — John Cassidy (07:19)
  “They strengthened Obamacare.” — Ryan Lizza (07:40)
• On the deficit:
  “We’ve had this historic fall in the deficit from 10% to 3% of GDP... I really can’t remember the last time that happened.” — John Cassidy (16:59)
• On party divides and the future:
  “Anyone who opposed this strategy will pay a price for it, which is why all of the Republican candidates... voted against it.” — Ryan Lizza (12:13)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 01:36 – President Obama’s remarks about moving beyond “governing by crisis”
• 02:10–03:59 – Panel on the “no winners” dynamic and the impact on the country
• 04:24 – Hendrik Hertzberg on the flaws of the American political system
• 05:27–07:05 – Obama’s handling, market reactions, and international perceptions
• 07:19 – John Cassidy on the Republican defeat and deal analysis
• 09:53 – John Boehner’s position after the crisis
• 10:36 – 2016 presidential field, and humorous aside on Cruz’s eligibility
• 12:13 – Ryan Lizza on the price of moderation in the Republican primary
• 13:52–16:59 – Future of budget negotiations, the deficit, and economic outlook

---

Tone & Language

• Direct, analytical, and sometimes wry.
• Frustration and skepticism toward American political gridlock are prominent.
• Notably, quips and pointed jabs (particularly about the GOP’s direction and Ted Cruz’s eligibility) leaven the policy-heavy discussion.

---

Conclusion

The episode provides a sharp, critical, and sometimes bleak assessment of the state of American politics after the 2013 shutdown. It argues that while Obama managed to hold firm, real change — either in Congressional behavior or economic policy — remains distant. The Republican Party is split between moderates and hardliners, and the structure of American politics ensures further “governing by crisis.” The country, not just individual parties, is the true loser in this dynamic.

Transcript

[Mint Mobile Advertiser]

As summer draws to a close and the kids go back to school, I know I'm going to want to keep in touch with my kids at a price I can afford. Back to school Shopping can be a hassle, but your phone plan shouldn't be. That's why I made the switch to Mint Mobile. For a limited time, Mint mobile is offering three months of unlimited premium wireless service for 15 bucks a month. So while other parents are sweating overage charges, I have a little bit more room in my budget for cool back to school threads. Say bye bye to your overpriced wireless plan's jaw dropping monthly bills and unexpected overages, Mint Mobile is here to rescue you. All plans come with high speed data and unlimited talk and text delivered on the nation's largest 5G network. Use your own phone with any Mint Mobile plan and bring your phone number along with all your existing contacts. Dish overpriced wireless and get three months of premium wireless service from Mint Mobile for 15 bucks a month. This year, skip breaking a sweat and breaking the bank. Get this new customer offer and your three month unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at mintmobile.com newyorker that's that's mintmobile.com new yorker upfront payment of $45 required, equivalent to $15 a month limited time new customer offer for first three months only. Speeds may slow above 35 gigabytes on unlimited plan taxes and fees extra. See Mint Mobile for details.

[Amelia Lester]

This is the Political Scene, a weekly conversation with New Yorker writers and editors about Politics. It's Thursday, October 17th. I'm Amelia Lester, in this week for Dorothy Wickenden. The debt ceiling crisis has ended and federal workers are back at work. Congress has finally passed legislation to fund the government through January 15th and lift the debt limit through February 7th.

[John Cassidy]

Hopefully next time it won't be in the 11th hour. One of the things that I said throughout this process is we've got to get out of the habit of governing by crisis.

[Amelia Lester]

That was President Obama speaking on Wednesday night. To talk about this latest round of Washington brinkmanship, I'm joined by Ryan Lizza, John Cassidy and Hendrick Hertzberg. Rick, House Republicans shut down the government and they threatened not to raise the debt ceiling in an effort to defund or at least delay Obamacare. They lost, but White House spokesman Jay Carney said there are no winners here. Do you agree with that?

[Hendrik Hertzberg]

Well, yeah. Winning and losing is often relative. If you score minus 5, you do a little better than someone who scores minus 20. But certainly there are no winners in the sense that the country has been damaged by this, the government has been damaged, the credit of the United States has been damaged, the international standing of the United States has been damaged.

[Amelia Lester]

And what for Ryan, what are you hearing? Are they celebrating in the White House today? Democrats didn't really give up anything in this deal.

[Ryan Lizza]

I hope they're not celebrating. I mean, I don't think there are any winners here. I agree with Rick that it's relative. And when one party so thoroughly loses, politics is a zero sum game. So the other party, I suppose wins. But what did anyone win at the end of the day here? Almost three weeks of a government shutdown, half a point of growth off of our economy in the next quarter. That's the estimate. And at the end of the day, the two parties agreed to meet in a conference committee and put two more roadblocks in the way in January and February. I think the other thing they think they've done, and I'm very skeptical of this, they think that because the Republicans didn't actually win any policy concessions here that they'll never try this again, that the days of this kind of brinksmanship are over. I'm also pretty skeptical of that. I think that the whole analysis since the reelection campaign that Obama can somehow break the fever of the Republican Party either by winning reelection or winning a sort of epic fight just misses the structural issues that keep that fever really, really high. The Republicans have this sort of impenetrable fortress in the House of Representatives, and I don't see them using the power they have in the House much differently than they have in the last few weeks going forward. Although that's sort of what the White House has been saying the last few days, that things will change after this.

[Amelia Lester]

Rick, do you agree? Could this be the breaking of the Republican Party's fever that Obama talked about before the 2012 election? Does it significantly weaken them or are we just going to see more of the same?

[Hendrik Hertzberg]

Well, I don't think it really breaks their fever. There's sort of good news and bad news here from my point of view as somebody who's a consistent critic of the structure of the American political system.

[Ryan Lizza]

That's what I'm writing about right now, Rick. So it's on my brain.

[Hendrik Hertzberg]

Yeah, well, it's finally sinking in, I think to a lot of people who have ignored it for decades, for centuries, that there's something amiss about the American political system that wonderful though it was by the standards of 1789, it just doesn't work very well. The Duty of an opposition is to oppose. That's what the Republicans are now doing. They oppose. And like the opposition in every other democracy, they vote no when it comes to the government's program. Our system can't really accommodate that. We have a weird system where the opposition is supposed to support who they oppose. Politicians have to be willing to sacrifice their self interest. They have to say, oh, I don't really care about getting reelected. Well, getting reelected is the engine for all democratic systems. And because ours doesn't make full use of it, ours is faulty.

[Amelia Lester]

So you didn't think the Republicans were doing anything out of line?

[Hendrik Hertzberg]

They were just, oh yeah, they were certainly violating custom. They were violating tradition. They were thoroughly unpleasant jerks.

[John Cassidy]

John, you know, this is the New Yorker. We are a liberal magazine. I think we should give Obama a bit of credit here. I mean, we've been criticizing him for years for not standing up to the sort of hardliners. Finally did it here and you know, he won. I think he does deserve some credit and I think there is a bit of a, you know, cause for celebration in the White House here. Sure, he hasn't changed the sort of structure of the government or the fact that the Republicans control the House of Representatives. You know, we have a divided government. But I think he has established a principle here that, you know, he's not going to give in on issues like the debt ceiling. And, you know, that's important. And I think, you know, you see that reflected in the markets. I think people actually in the markets had more faith in the government than most political commentators here. This was supposed to be a financial crisis, right? So if it was a real financial crisis, you would have seen evidence of that in the bond market. Now there was a slight move in sort of short term Treasuries, but there was absolutely no sign of the sort of panic you get when governments are about to default. If you go and look at a sort of developing world economic crisis in somewhere like Argentina or Thailand back in the 90s, when governments are about to default, the markets go completely crazy. Nobody in the markets actually believe that here. They thought it was just all the usual Washington theater and ultimately they were proved right. There are estimates that we may have lost 30, 40 billion dollars of GDP. Those may be reliable, maybe they're not. A lot of it comes back in the next quarter or in the next few weeks when people get their back pay that they didn't get for the last few weeks. So there is a bit of an economic hit here. And I agree with Rick. There's a big hit to the sort of US reputation around the world and US Soft power, as it's known. But I don't think it's that big a deal financially. It wasn't a real crisis in that sense.

[Amelia Lester]

John. It became clear last week that the Republicans were going to lose this battle. And John McCain warned Obama not to humiliate Republicans because what goes around comes around. So what exactly is in the deal and do you think that it humiliates Republicans?

[John Cassidy]

Well, I think it is a humiliation for the Republican Party. There's no doubt about that. I mean, everything. They got a slight concession on Obamacare. Remember we go back to a few weeks, they were demanding defunding of Obamacare as a price of reopening the government. They dropped that demand. In return, they got a sort of slight tightening of the eligibility qualifications.

[Ryan Lizza]

They strengthened Obamacare.

[John Cassidy]

Right. You're going to have to do a bit more to prove that you're eligible for the very generous subsidies, which, you know, is probably a good thing. We don't want people, right?

[Ryan Lizza]

I mean, who could object to that?

[John Cassidy]

Yeah, we don't want people who aren't eligible to be getting this. But that was pretty much it. You know, there was talk that they wanted, you know, big changes in spending and changes in the law to prevent the treasury sort of manipulating the finances around the time of debt crisis. None of that appears to be in the bill. So it was a straightforward defeat. Now, of course, in the Republican Party, you know, as somebody said a long time ago, they don't live in a reality based community necessarily. So they're still on the right. They're saying this was a great success. At least we stood up to Obama, but also stood up to the GOP establishment. So this is just going to be another example. I mean, ultimately we've got a protest party within the Republican Party. This is not a party which is interested in government. The protest party, the Tea Party, Ted Cruz people, it's a party which is interested in bringing down the government and doing everything they can to stop the government functioning. So to the extent they stop the government functioning for two and a half weeks, you can see how they might see that as a bit of a success. So there are already people, if you read the papers today and look at their quotes, they're all saying we're just gearing up for the next time round. Now, I think it's important next time around we'll have already established the sort of fact that the credibility of their threats to push us over the debt default are not going to be very strong. So the crisis might not be as serious next time, but it's going to be continuous crisis. I mean, we live in continuous crisis. We have a divided government with a. With a sort of subset of the Republican Party who aren't interested in anything except doing down Obama and stopping the government from functioning. That's where we are.

[Ryan Lizza]

I mean, if they. If there was really a lesson learned here, and if they really were worried about their cratering poll numbers, and if they really thought that this entire exercise was such a strategic disaster, the House Republicans wouldn't have voted 144 to 87 against the legislation last night. I mean, there should have been some evidence, at least in the vote, that there was a little bit of regret here. And. And there wasn't, John.

[Amelia Lester]

A few months ago, John Boehner opposed shutting down the government, and yet that's precisely what the House just did under his leadership. So how does he come out looking in all this?

[John Cassidy]

I think there's two interesting things here. One is the sort of status quo ante in the House appears to have confirmed itself. A lot of people thought Boehner might lose the speakership over this if he handled it badly. He actually seems to have come out of it pretty well. I mean, he leaned far enough to the right that if you read the comments of most of the Tea Party right wingers, even after their big defeat, they say, well, Bainer did pretty much everything we asked, so there's not going to be a challenge there. I think the bigger and more interesting question is what it augurs for the Republican party nationally for 2014 and for 2016 presidential race. I mean, clearly we've now got another candidate on the ride, it looks like. Although can Cruz run for president because he was born in Canada, that's a good thing.

[Ryan Lizza]

He says he can.

[Hendrik Hertzberg]

It's not like he's Kenyan or anything.

[John Cassidy]

So on the right, things are shook up a bit. Rand Paul, who clearly will run again, was actually a voice of sort of quasi moderation in this. Paul Ryan, you know, is probably going to be there again, basically sat it out, but he's now going to enter the fray again because he's the Republican negotiator in the latest debt negotiation committee with Senator Paddy Murray of Washington. So, you know, these interesting implications for the. For the Republican field and also just for the Republican Party nationally. I mean, after the election, we saw a sort of fight back from the Republican Party establishment, issuing reports saying, look, you know, the party's got to move back to the center we're just alienating too many vot. If we ever want to win national power again, we need a shift to the centre. We've seen the absolute opposite here, of course, you know, the sort of ultras in the party defining the party's image in the country. So I think it's gonna be very interesting to see from here whether there is actually. I mean, it's a sort of dog that didn't bark. Where is moderate Republicanism?

[Amelia Lester]

It's interesting, too, because corporations and business groups who are, after all, traditional backers of the Republican Party, seem pretty alarmed at how far the Tea Party Republicans seem prepared to take this.

[John Cassidy]

I mean, you know, if you take a sort of strict Marxian analysis of it, you, Republican party should be a lot more moderate because most of its corporate donators certainly have no interest in either shutting down the government or, you know, risking a debt default.

[Amelia Lester]

So how's that going to be?

[John Cassidy]

The economic basis of moderate Republicanism is still there, but the political basis seems to have disappeared. I don't know what Rick and Ryan think. I mean, can anybody, you know, run from the Republican moderate side of the party and have more credibility than Mitt Romney did?

[Ryan Lizza]

I think it's going to be tough. I mean, I think the same dynamic that happened in 2012 will continue into 2016. Anyone who opposed this strategy will pay a price for it, which is why all of the Republican candidates who are thinking about running in 2016 and all the ones at least that are in Congress voted against it. I mean, look at the two models you have here for how to be a legislator. If you're thinking about running For President in 2016, you have Marco Rubio. And Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio came out after the 2012 election, got together with seven other bipartisan group, with seven other senators, and put together a very complicated immigration reform bill that had all of the traditional pluses and minuses of a big piece of legislation, you know, compromises, horse trading. And as that thing passed through the Senate, he got absolutely savaged from the right to the point where he won't talk about it anymore. And I doubt you'll see him ever enter into any bipartisan negotiations from here until 2016. Then you have Ted Cruz, who just got to the Senate, hasn't done anything, hasn't tried to do any bipartisan legislation. And his big claim to fame, of course, is driving the country close to default and into a government shutdown. And he's a hero on the right and among the most passionate voters that are important in the Republican primaries.

[Amelia Lester]

Ryan, the president had always said during this crisis that he wasn't going to negotiate until the debt ceiling legislation was passed. And now that has happen. But are we going to now enter a phase of more controversy and deadlock about entitlements and spending? How do you see this playing out over the coming months?

[Ryan Lizza]

The Venn diagram of things that these two parties agree on to get a budget deal is just, it's not a whole lot of overlap. Republicans still seem absolutely opposed to any new revenues and frankly that now that the deficit situation has improved, the pressure on House Democrats and liberals to sort of suck it up and take some of these entitlement cuts that Obama seems okay with, that's much reduced. So, John, and I'd be interested to hear what you guys think of this, but I don't really see the contours of a deal here. Do you guys?

[John Cassidy]

No, I don't see it. I mean, that is one of the. We're talking about the country losing. I mean, it looks like, you know, the sequester is just going to remain in place for the indefinite future. And there have been studies out this week showing, you know, the impact that's having. It's had a big impact. The sort of people. One of the central facts of American sort of politics and economics in the last few years is a big, big fall in the deficit. You know, it's gone from 10% of GDP, I think it was in 2010. It's going to come in at like 3% or something this year and may fall to 2%, I think it is next year. That's an enormous fall in the deficit. And people just don't seem to have taken it on board. You know, if you listen to Ted Cruz and people, they're still talking about bringing down the deficit.

[Ryan Lizza]

Yeah, Paul Ryan is still talking about it the same way he was talking about it in 2011.

[John Cassidy]

Right, right. So, you know, what we've had is we've had an overly tough fiscal policy. And, you know, you've seen that that's why they one of the big reasons why the economy is still pretty tepid, why we've still got sort of one and a half, 2% growth instead of 3 or 4% growth, which you would normally expect to see at this stage in the cycle. We've already had quite a lot of austerity. We should be focusing on growing the economy now, but there doesn't seem to be any chance of switching to that. So we're going to have continued basically austerity policies on the fiscal side. At the same time, the Federal Reserve is preparing to sort of withdraw some of the monetary stimulus and quantitative easing that it's been propping up the economy for in the last few years. So, you know, if you put those two things together, it looks like we've got tepid growth going ahead as well. And, you know, that is a big cost to the country of the political paralysis in Washington.

[Hendrik Hertzberg]

And John, isn't the implication of what you're saying that the problem with the deficit is that the deficit has to be bigger? Of course, no politician dares say that. But isn't that the truth?

[John Cassidy]

Well, it wouldn't necessarily be bigger, I don't think, Rick. I mean, we need a bit more stimulus policies. The argument is that we've still got, you know, 7% unemployment. That may be too low as well. I mean, because the fall in the participation rate, basically, there's still a lot of slack out there in the economy. So there's no reason to believe that if we had another sort of small stimulus, it would lead to a big takeoff in inflation. It would almost certainly lead to higher growth. And when you get higher growth, you get higher tax revenues. So the deficit might go up a bit, but it wouldn't go up much. There's room for sort of more fiscal support for the economy without risking a return to 10% deficits. It may go up a bit, it may stay the same, but it certainly shouldn't be coming down any further. It shouldn't be another sort of hit to the economy from even tighter fiscal policies, which is what the Republicans are asking for. I mean, you know, that's crazy. Just to repeat, we've had this historic fall in the deficit from 10% to 3% of GDP. I mean, I really can't remember the last time that happened. I doubt it's ever happened, actually, in the period that we've seen two or three years.

[Amelia Lester]

Well, John, thanks for making us all feel a lot better about the deficit. And thanks to all of you. Hendrik Hertzberg is a political essayist and senior editor for the magazine. Ryan Lizzart and John Cassidy are staff writers, and John blogs frequently about politics on the New Yorker's website. This has been the political scene from the New Yorker. I'm Amelia Lester. Dorothy Wickenden will be back next week.

[Ryan Lizza]

You can subscribe to this and other free New Yorker podcasts in the itunes store. The weekly audio edition of the magazine is available at audible.com Subscribers can read the magazine online at new yorker.com and also in the tablet edition on the iPad and the Kindle Fire.

[Amelia Lester]

America is changing, and so is the world.

[John Cassidy]

But what's happening in America isn't just the cause of global upheaval. It's also a symptom of disruption that's happening everywhere.

[Mint Mobile Advertiser]

I'm Asma Khalid in Washington, D.C. i'm.

[John Cassidy]

Tristan Redman in London, and this is the Global Story.

[Amelia Lester]

Every weekday, we'll bring you a story from this intersection where the world and America meet.

[John Cassidy]

Listen on BBC.com or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ryan Lizza]

From.

[Amelia Lester]

PRX.