Joe Biden’s re-election hype team, Building Back Together, released an ad on the debt limit deal that manages to say almost nothing about the deal itself. Three of the four selling points involve things the deal didn’t touch (Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid); it managed to add that veterans benefits were expanded. (The increase in VA health care to the Biden budget level is below the rate of inflation, and only grows above that if you include appropriations for the PACT Act, which was separately passed last year.)

Presidents seeking re-election are going to tout bipartisan deals, even ones without much to celebrate. What has Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) concerned is that so many Democrats affirmed the agreement. "Our strategy was to not give them one vote more than what they needed to pass," Jayapal told the Prospect in an interview last Friday, "with enough of a strong no vote to make clear that it was not a good deal."

In the end, more Democrats approved the Fiscal Responsibility Act in the House and Senate than Republicans, despite the fact that the only members of Congress who negotiated the agreement directly were in the House GOP. In the name of averting default, this has pulled Democrats into supporting policies that House Republicans want to expand.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy could barely hold back his glee with reporters. "I think it’s wonderful that [Democrats] voted for it, because they are now on record," McCarthy said. "Let’s get the rest of the IRS agents, let’s get the rest of the work requirements, let’s cut more, because we are in a big debt."

Already, the must-pass farm bill is emerging as a battleground for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Republicans want to build on the work requirement for childless, able-bodied adults, which was extended to age 55. Democrats are saying that further changes are off the table. Jayapal argues that significant Democratic support for some work requirements—even the lead Democrats on the House and Senate Agriculture Committees voted for the deal—could weaken the Democratic hand.

Jayapal was among just 46 Democrats who voted against the bill last week. In a surprise, 52 Democrats voted for the rule to begin debate on the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Rule votes are almost always conducted along party lines, but Freedom Caucus types revolted, necessitating a Democratic rescue to save the deal.

Axios initially reported that a side deal, potentially around increasing earmarks for federal projects in Democratic districts, got Democrats to support the rule. But both McCarthy and Democratic Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) denied this. "House Democrats simply did the right thing and made sure the procedural vote passed because failure was not an option," said a Jeffries spokesperson.

Jayapal thinks Democrats should have gotten something from saving the bill. She pointed out that the deal enabled increases in military spending without a concurrent rise in nondefense accounts. It creates a lower baseline for the future trajectory of federal spending. And it established concessions under the threat of default as normal political practice, one that Republicans could try again as little as two years from now.

The White House is pleased that they mostly allowed Republicans rhetorical satisfaction, while the reality of the deal is more muted. But there are political implications to giving that kind of ground, Jayapal warned.

"We have to be clear that in principle and in policy, there will be people that will be hurt," she said. "For a lot of Democrats who are not for these things who voted yes, they are going to have to figure out how to explain what they did."