There are twelve senators and, more importantly, thirty-six House Republicans who have pledged not to vote to raise the debt ceiling unless a Balanced Budget Amendment has been passed through Congress. There are probably another thirty House Republicans who feel similarly but who haven’t signed the pledge. Passing an amendment to the Constitution through Congress requires two-thirds of both Houses, which is simply not going to happen, so these members have effectively decided that they will not vote to raise the debt ceiling. It’s true that some of them might be persuaded to break their pledge, but only for something much more generous than the Democrats are willing to offer.

A vote to raise the debt ceiling only requires a simple majority, which is 218 votes in the House. The Republicans have 240 seats and the Democrats currently have 193, I believe. So, let’s do some simple math. We’ll stick with the 36 number even though we know it’s higher. Two hundred and forty minus thirty-six is two hundred and four. That means Speaker Boehner, at a minimum, would have to get 14 Democrats to vote for any bill to raise the debt ceiling. For each additional Republican who won’t vote to raise the debt ceiling, you can add
a Democrat. I’ve seen numbers ranging from 60 to 120 (the latter being a full half of the Republican caucus).

I’m inclined to believe a lower number, but even at 60, that forces Boehner to craft some agreement that can win the support of at least thirty-eight Democrats. That’s a substantially bigger number than the entire Blue Dog Caucus. And any bill that could attract several dozen Democrats would not have the kind of cuts to entitlements that might make some Republicans willing to break their pledge. Moreover, it would alienate fence-sitters who would be practically guaranteeing a major Tea Party primary challenge.

Wall Street and the Chamber of Commerce have both made it very clear to the Republicans that they do not want to see the U.S. lose its credit rating and they’ve convinced McConnell and Boehner to back down. But that doesn’t mean they can craft anything that can pass. Their best bet is something along the lines of what Mitch McConnell proposed, which is to give the president his money but make him exercise a veto in order to get it. At least in this scenario, no Republicans will have to vote in a straightforward fashion to raise the debt ceiling. But this political jujitsu isn’t a very attractive option. For Tea Party Republicans, it’s a transparent capitulation that may invoke some political pain on the president but also takes away all their leverage to force historic cuts in government spending. For Democrats, it’s simply annoying and bad policy.

“The McConnell plan does nothing about the debt! How can that be?” said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who unveiled a plan Monday that would cut $4 trillion from the deficit over the next decade.

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) criticized McConnell’s plan, saying on Bill Press’s radio show that it “punts the ball down the road.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) stopped short of endorsing the proposal, but said it has “merit.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a member of the Budget panel, said there were “pros and cons” to the proposal.

Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska), a member of the Budget Committee, said he is uncomfortable about heaping all the responsibility — and expected political blame — on Obama.

“To say it’s only the president’s problem is irresponsible,” Begich said. “Did the people who have been here for 10 years suddenly get amnesia? They helped drive up the deficit. This is everybody’s problem, the president’s and Congress’s.”

The thing to remember here is that the House can’t pass anything. The president can work out some deal with Boehner and Cantor that cuts two trillion dollars, raises the Medicare eligibility age, cuts the COLA adjustments to Social Security, and whatever else, but without the Balanced Budget Amendment, the House won’t pass it. And there really isn’t any sweet spot where the president can win over some conservatives without the Democrats balking.

Now, the president may be sincere in wanting to actually tackle the budget right now when there seems to be the political will to do something tough that otherwise might not be palatable to his own party. That’s what he’s saying. That’s how he’s negotiating. But he also knows that Boehner and Cantor can’t sell any acceptable deal to their caucus. In addition to the Balanced Budget Amendment issue, there’s also the issue of raising some revenue from either tax hikes or the elimination of tax breaks. The House Republicans won’t go for that either. So, what’s really going on is an effort to assign blame. The blame can be for one of two things. It can be blame for defaulting on our debts, ruining our credit score, and causing an economic catastrophe. Or the blame can be for raising the debt limit without addressing our deficits. The way the president has positioned himself, he does not stand to take any blame for either outcome. Oh sure, the other side will try to blame him. And, as the president, he’s still going to own the economy to a great extent. But people will be pretty united in blaming the Republicans for their intransigence and irresponsibility in the face of a good-faith and fair offer.

For this to work, the president must be seen to be acting in good faith, which means he must convince most people that what he’s put on the table is for real. But everything he’s put on the table has been conditioned on the Republicans dropping the Balanced Budget nonsense and agreeing to more tax revenues. The president knows that the Republicans cannot agree to those terms.

This is why McConnell and Boehner caved. They want to pass the gun they’ve been holding to the head of the economy back to the president because they realize that their party is too irresponsible to be trusted with it. Right now, the Republican leadership is wishing they had never gone along with this hostage-taking plan.

McConnell on Wednesday said the Republican brand would be destroyed by a default, claiming it would clinch a second term for President Obama.

“Not on my watch,” McConnell said on Laura Ingraham’s radio show.

It’s now up to Cantor to explain to the Tea Party Republicans in the House that they’ve lost this round and that default is not an option. What he needs to explain to them is that for every one of them that votes against a bill, Boehner has to sweeten the deal enough to attract a Democrat. The more intransigent they are, the worse the capitulation. McConnell is trying to give them all a face-saving device. And, as stupid, cynical, and irresponsible as that device is, it’s the best deal available to the Republicans.