Voters may not care if spending bills pass

[Bloomberg]( Follow Us [Get the newsletter]( Get Jonathan Bernstein’s newsletter every morning in your inbox. [Click here to subscribe.]( The policy decisions at stake in the two major bills now moving through Congress — the $1 trillion bipartisan [infrastructure effort]( that’s been passed by the Senate and the second $3.5 trillion [spending plan]( that Democrats intend to enact through the reconciliation process that sidesteps a Senate filibuster because no Republicans support it — are indeed large. But as Congress returns to work on these bills, with the outcome still unknown, lets keep a bit of perspective. There’s no reason to expect passage or rejection of these bills to have strong electoral effects, and if it does matter in November 2022 or November 2024 there’s no guarantee that success would help Democrats. Perhaps the most obvious comparison would be the aftermath of the Democrats’ failure to pass health-care reform in 1993-1994, and then of their triumph in passing the Affordable Care Act in 2009-2010. While those efforts were the most prominent legislative initiatives in both cases, they were surrounded by other fiascos (during the first two years of Bill Clinton’s presidency) and successes (when Barack Obama was president). In both cases, the electoral results were more or less the same — a disaster for the party in the midterms, followed by re-election for Clinton and Obama two years later. That’s hardly the only relevant historical example. The most successful and productive Congress since the New Deal was the one following the huge Democratic landslide of 1964. The electoral fallout? Big Republican gains in 1966 and a Richard Nixon presidency two years later. It’s not that voters hated what that Congress did. It’s just that voters are willing and able to take even brand-new programs for granted and ask, in effect, what have you done for me lately? And if the answer isn’t peace and prosperity, it doesn’t matter what else has happened. Some analysts speculate that the disconnect between government policies and public opinion is a function of programs designed to be less visible to the public. But stimulus checks — certainly a visible government intervention — didn’t produce noticeable public-opinion gains for President Donald Trump in 2020 or President Joe Biden in 2021. Nor did direct child-credit payments this summer. It’s not just electoral effects. There’s no way to be sure that provisions dropped from the two big spending bills will be dead for the remainder of Biden’s presidency. Yes, the best chance of passing them probably comes early in the presidency and with Democrats holding majorities (albeit extremely slim ones) in both chambers of Congress. But Democrats were able to pass some of their agenda in the final six years of both the Clinton and Obama presidencies despite divided government. The most recent Congress, in 2019-2020, wound up being surprisingly productive, again despite divided government. And of course it’s not impossible that Democrats could have larger majorities at some point during the Biden presidency, especially if he runs for and wins a second term. None of this is to play down the importance of what Democrats are trying to accomplish over the next few weeks. These are massive bills that will have — if they pass — all sorts of effects on the day-to-day life of many Americans. They will, depending on which economists you believe, either improve or diminish the long-term prospects of the U.S. economy. And even though it’s possible that some provisions will become policy even if the bills fail or if they are cut from legislation that passes, this is probably the biggest legislative decision point of this Congress, and quite possibly of Biden’s presidency for however long it lasts. It’s just that too much current commentary and partisan rhetoric treats each decision point as if the fate of the republic was at stake. In an era when the republic really may be in danger, it’s worth trying to keep perspective on even important events. It’s true that passage or failure of these bills is a big deal, because the policies involved are numerous and important. That should be hype enough. 1. Sophie Meunier at the Monkey Cage on [why France is upset]( with the U.S. 2. Robert Farley on [Ulysses S. Grant as a general](. 3. Harry Enten on [public opinion about the pandemic](. 4. Josh Kraushaar on Trump and [Republican nominations in 2022](. 5. Jonathan Cohn on the Democrats’ plan to [transform caregiving](. 6. And my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Hal Brands [on the Chinese tech giant Huawei](. Get Early Returns every morning in your inbox. [Click here to subscribe](. Also subscribe to [Bloomberg All Access]( and get much, much more. You’ll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close. Before it’s here, it’s on the Bloomberg Terminal. Find out more about how the Terminal delivers information and analysis that financial professionals can’t find anywhere else. [Learn more](. You received this message because you are subscribed to Bloomberg's Early Returns newsletter. [Unsubscribe]( | [Bloomberg.com]( | [Contact Us]( [Ads Powered By Liveintent]( | [Ad Choices]( Bloomberg L.P. 731 Lexington, New York, NY, 10022