To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

Federal shutdown to continue into next week as Senate adjourns

WASHINGTON --
The Senate has adjourned without a deal to end a partial government shutdown as talks drag on over President Donald Trump's border wall with Mexico.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has ended the rare Saturday session hours after the Senate had opened.

Talks are underway at the Capitol involving Vice President Mike Pence and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer.

But there's no resolution to the impasse, and the Senate isn't scheduled to meet again until Monday - Christmas Eve - for a pro forma session. The next full session of the Senate is now scheduled for this coming Thursday.

The partial shutdown started early Saturday amid a standoff over Trump's request for $5 billion for the wall. Democrats have refused, and are offering to keep funding at existing levels, $1.3 billion, for border security, but not the wall.

Vice President Mike Pence, Trump son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner and White House budget chief Mick Mulvaney left the Capitol late Friday after hours of bargaining with congressional leaders produced no apparent compromise.

Mulvaney sent agency heads a memorandum telling them to "execute plans for an orderly shutdown." He wrote that administration officials were "hopeful that this lapse in appropriations will be of short duration." That expectation was widely shared.
More:

https://abc7ny.com/politics/senate-adjo ... e/4942544/
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

There's a very good chance that this will drag into the new year, and the next Congress...

Because a lot fewer people and services are effected than in previous shutdowns, (only about 25% of government personnel and operations are affected; for example the troops will continue to get paid, so they don't have the PR disaster of people risking their lives in war zones not getting their pay checks) and because a lot of people take vacation time at this time of year anyway, the public pressure for a resolution will probably take longer to build than during previous shutdowns...

From the link in my last post:
The impasse blocked money for nine of 15 Cabinet-level departments and dozens of agencies, including the departments of Homeland Security, Transportation, Interior, Agriculture, State and Justice.

Those being furloughed included nearly everyone at NASA and 52,000 workers at the Internal Revenue Service. About 8 in 10 employees of the National Park Service were to stay home; many parks were expected to close.

Some agencies, including the Pentagon and the departments of Veterans Affairs and Health and Human Services, were already funded and will operate as usual. Also still functioning were the FBI, the Border Patrol and the Coast Guard. Transportation Security Administration officers continued to staff airport checkpoints and air traffic controllers were on the job.[Though I believe the Border Patrol and TSA agents are in the group that are required to work but wont get paid until this is over.]

Many of Congress' most conservative Republicans welcomed such a confrontation, but most GOP lawmakers wanted to avoid one because polling found the public opposed the wall and a shutdown over it.
If this does go into the next Congress with no resolution in sight, I suspect the first thing that will happen is that something very much like the Senate passed bill will be put on the floor of the House by Pelosi, where it will certainly pass, most likely with a veto-proof majority. (Assuming all the Dems vote for it, they would would only need about one quarter of the Republicans to hit that 2/3 threshold)

Then it will have to go back to the Senate, (Since it will be a new Congress, an new vote will be required) which is where things start to get interesting...

It passed in this Senate unanimously on a voice vote, but that was when the Republican members thought Trump had signed on to it...

The first question is whether McConnell will even bring it to the floor if Trump isn't on board. Then if he does, the next question is if there would be enough GOP votes to provide the the 2/3 margin...

The answers to these two questions will depend in large measure on how badly Trump and the GOP are being beat up in the polls over the shutdown. It will also provide an early test of Trump's clout with the Senate in the wake of the midterm election reversals and his own lowering popularity numbers...
ImageImageImage

Burning Petard
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Burning Petard »

As I understand it, many of the people considered 'non-essential' are also low wage, hourly workers. Because they are not working the days around the holidays, I think they are gonna get no holiday pay. even if there is some kind of back pay. Meanwhile, the political appointees may or may not have pay checks delayed, but will not see any reduction in pay overall. So much for care about the little guy. Those nasty Eastern elites again.

IMNSHO, it all goes back to both parties refusal to pass a real federal budget for a long, long time. The gove has been working 'continuing resolutions ' for years. This is the third shut down this year.

snailgate

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16566
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Scooter »

Best line I've seen about this so far: "Why doesn't Trump just hire a contractor to build the wall and stiff them when it's done?"
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9032
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Why does Trump need $5 billion from Congress to build the wall? Didn't he keep telling us he was going to make Mexico pay for it?
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

Wow, here's a surprise:
Poll: 47% of Americans blame Trump for government shutdown

More Americans blame President Donald Trump than congressional Democrats for the partial U.S. government shutdown, a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Thursday found, as lawmakers returned to Washington with no quick end to the shutdown in sight.

Forty-seven percent of adults in the U.S. hold Trump responsible, while 33 percent blame Democrats in Congress, according to the Dec. 21-25 poll, conducted mostly after the shutdown began. Seven percent of Americans blamed congressional Republicans.

The shutdown was triggered by Trump’s demand, largely opposed by Democrats and some Republicans, that taxpayers provide him with $5 billion to help pay for a wall he wants to build on the Mexican border. Its total estimated cost is $23 billion.

Just 35 percent of those surveyed in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said they backed including money for the wall in a congressional spending bill. Only 25 percent said they supported Trump shutting down the government over the matter.

The shutdown, now in its sixth day, has a had limited impact so far, partly due to vacations for the 800,000 federal workers affected, though that could change soon.

Earlier this month, he said he would be “proud to shut down the government” over wall funding. On Twitter, since the shutdown started, he has tried to blame the Democrats.

In a tweet on Thursday, he framed the shutdown as a partisan issue, saying, “Do the Dems realize that most of the people not getting paid are Democrats?”

The assertion, for which Trump provided no evidence, drew immediate criticism from Democrats.

“Federal employees don’t go to work wearing red or blue jerseys,” Democratic Senator Mark Warner wrote on Twitter.

“They’re public servants. And the president is treating them like poker chips at one of his failed casinos,” Warner said.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politi ... wn-n952466
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9032
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Lord Jim wrote:Wow, here's a surprise:
Poll: 47% of Americans blame Trump for government shutdown
I'll say!!
Only 47%??
There are obviously still far too many people who can't see the woods for the trees.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9566
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

"ONLY 47% ?????" was my reaction as well.

BTW, I wonder how much traction the Trump presidential campaign would have gotten if he had repeatedly promised his cheering supporters, "I'm gonna build a YOOOGE, expensive wall...and *YOU'RE* gonna pay for it!!!!"
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

As is so often the case with anything related to Il Boobce, it was a tough call to decide if this shouldn't be posted in the "You really can't make this shit up" thread instead:
Trump: Shutdown has 'higher purpose than next week's pay'

Thousands of federal employees are on furlough during the partial government shutdown, but President Donald Trump said Friday that it’s for a good cause.

“This really does have a higher purpose than next week’s pay,” Trump said during a news conference. [Says the guy who started racking up millions in inheritance while he was still in the cradle, and has never had to work for a living in his life. Yo, Trumpanzees: this is the clown who sold himself to you as the hero of the "little guy". How's that workin'?]

Speaking to reporters shortly after meeting with congressional leaders to discuss negotiating an end to the nearly two-week shutdown, Trump repeatedly brushed off questions about federal workers who could miss paychecks, hammering instead his talking point that the country needs stronger border security measures.

The shutdown stems from Trump’s insistence that funding legislation to reopen the government include billions of dollars for physical barriers at the border with Mexico, which Democrats who control the House have refused to approve.

When asked whether there would be any safety net for federal employees who don’t get paid because of the shutdown, Trump said: “Well, the safety net is going to be having a strong border because we’re going to be safe.” [Oh goodie; they can take a chunk of the wall with them to the supermarket to pay for their groceries... :loon ]

Of landlords expecting rent from federal employees, he said he’d “encourage them to be nice and easy” on their tenants.[Yeah, that'll work... :lol: :loon ]

The remarks also came as The Washington Post reported that at the same time thousands of federal workers were going without pay, hundreds of senior Trump political appointees were set to get raises of about $10,000 a year. The raises are the result of Congress failing to renew a cap on those appointees’ pay, allowing their salaries to go up, the Post reported.

When asked whether he would tell his appointees not to accept the raise, Trump said he would consider it.

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said after the news conference that the administration is “exploring options to prevent this from being implemented while some federal workers are furloughed. Congress can easily take care of this by funding the government and securing our borders.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/ ... se-1081758

But you really shouldn't feel to bad about these folks, because they're actually happy to be going without their paychecks:
Trump Claims Most Furloughed Federal Workers Are Rooting For Him On Wall Funding

President Donald Trump dodged questions Friday about how federal workers may be struggling to get by during the lengthy partial government shutdown, claiming that most of them are standing behind him.

“Many of those people, maybe most of those people, that really have not been ― and will not be getting their money in at this moment ― those people, in many cases, are the biggest fan of what we’re doing,” :loon :loon :loon Trump told reporters during a press conference.

Trump has made unsubstantiated claims about support for his wall throughout the shutdown to deflect from the real financial consequences that individuals caught up in this fight are facing.

Polls find that most Americans do not support the wall or funding for it. While some federal workers may back the president’s stance, there’s no evidence that most of them do.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tr ... b4c25bab28
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 14024
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Joe Guy »

I don't know if this has been addressed here, but I heard Trump say that he could declare a national emergency and build a wall "very quickly". Why doesn't he just do it then?

He wouldn't lie about that, would he?

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9032
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Joe Guy wrote:I don't know if this has been addressed here, but I heard Trump say that he could declare a national emergency and build a wall "very quickly". Why doesn't he just do it then?

He wouldn't lie about that, would he?
Or he could do it the same way Berlin built their wall, or Mayor Daley (another "my way or no way" politician) destroyed Meigs Field, or the Nazis invaded Poland. Without warning, blitzkrieg-style, In the middle of the night.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

Burning Petard
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Burning Petard »

How soon before all those private property owners who have legal title to the places where POTUS wants to put his wall, or fence, or beaded curtain, realize what that will do to their present use of that property, when you consider all the process for installing and maintaining it?

snailgate

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9566
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Econoline »

Image
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

Burning Petard
Posts: 4094
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Burning Petard »

I heard on NPR Sunday afternoon that the Trump people actually had a real plan to get Mexico to pay for the wall back before the election. WaPo has been pushing on it since and nobody at the White House will say why they have gone silent on it. The Basic Plan: Lots of Mexicans are working in the USA and sending back money to their family in Mexico--perhaps billions per year. Those beaners really love their family. So stop the money transfers to Mexico [not clear how, since we can't stop the drugs coming here from Mexico]. This would be done by various Executive powers, without new legislation. Then offer to turn back on the money spigot to Mexico when Mexico forks over a lump sum of 5-10 billion dollars to pay for the wall.

That is the plan. Not clear why it has not been openly touted by the Whitehouse or Fox and Friends.

snailgate

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 16566
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Scooter »

A variation was circulating during the campaign that remittances to Mexico from the U.S. would be subject to some sort of tax. Both plans are completely impractical in the era of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin.
"If you don't have a seat at the table, you're on the menu."

-- Author unknown

User avatar
Bicycle Bill
Posts: 9032
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:10 pm
Location: Surrounded by Trumptards in Rockland, WI – a small rural village in La Crosse County

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Bicycle Bill »

Burning Petard wrote:... Lots of Mexicans are working in the USA and sending back money to their family in Mexico--perhaps billions per year. Those beaners really love their family.
'Beaners' ?
Careful there, BP, or the PC Police hereabouts will be all over your ass next.
Image
-"BB"-
Yes, I suppose I could agree with you ... but then we'd both be wrong, wouldn't we?

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

Beyond the 800,000 federal employees, (and their families) and the many thousands of government contractors and their employees, (and families) the number of people affected by the shutdown is about to expand by millions:
Shutdown may jeopardize tax refunds, food stamps: report

The two-week-old partial government shutdown could significantly reduce food stamps for nearly 40 million Americans and freeze or delay more than $140 billion in tax refunds if it extends into February, The Washington Post reported Friday.

Several senior administration officials told the Post that the White House did not anticipate the shutdown could last that long and only recently recognized its widespread impact. [You mean to tell me that Trump dove into a major policy decision without thinking it through? :o]
https://thehill.com/homenews/administra ... mps-report

Even though going the "national emergency" route for his wall fetish is very problematic for Trump strategically...(He'd have to take the money out of funds appropriated for defense, and there's also a very good chance it would get shot down by the courts in short order)

"Strategically" has never been a big consideration for Trump, and as this wears on and the affects spread (and pressure grows on Senate Republicans...) I believe this faux "national emergency" idea is going to start looking more and more attractive to Il Boobce as a way to at least get out of the immediate corner he's painted himself into...

It would give him the chance to look like Mr. Strongman, acting dramatically and unilaterally (which is something Trump enjoys almost as much as using the Presidency to line his own pockets) and also allow him to sign the funding authorization bills without really looking like he was backing down...

If it gets blocked by the courts, well, that's a problem for another day...
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

Trump Wants to Deliver Prime-Time Address on Government Shutdown and Will Visit the Border

President Trump announced on Monday that he would address the nation from the Oval Office on Tuesday evening to discuss what he called the crisis at the southern border, and the White House said that later in the week he would travel to the border as part of his effort to persuade Americans of the need for a wall — the sticking point in negotiations with Democrats which caused a government shutdown.

It was not immediately clear which outlets would carry his address.[If it were my call, I sure as hell wouldn't broadcast it. Let the cable news channels carry it, there's no reason for the broadcast networks to give Trump a huge platform for no other purpose than for him to lie and fear monger shamelessly and throw meat to his base. There's certainly zero pressing national interest involved in that.]

The four major broadcast networks — ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC — confirmed receiving the White House request on Monday for Mr. Trump to speak during the 9 p.m. Eastern Standard Time slot, but producers had not decided whether to grant him the time. Pre-empting prime-time coverage is an expensive proposition for television executives, who have sold millions of dollars’ worth of advertising against entertainment programming.

Mr. Trump’s remarks could also be covered by cable news networks, which have a much smaller audience. CNN has agreed to air the address, a spokeswoman said on Monday. But cable news stations are accustomed to cutting in for breaking news, and they reach a far smaller audience than traditional broadcast stations.

In the recent past, White House requests to interrupt prime-time programming on the nation’s broadcast networks were rare and usually reserved for moments of national import, like the death of Osama bin Laden, and networks usually granted the requests. There have been instances, however, where such requests were rejected by producers as insufficiently newsworthy.

In an effort to justify his demands for a border wall, Mr. Trump has tried to paint the situation at the southern border as an imminent humanitarian and national security crisis, which Democrats and several immigration advocates argue is inaccurate.[The facts indicate indisputably that there is no "national security crisis" at the border, and to the extent that there is in fact a humanitarian crisis, it has been brought on entirely by policies pursued by this administration and all he has to do to end it is to reverse those policies.]

The acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, has for days told other White House officials that a presidential address would be a way for Mr. Trump to try and recast the narrative around the shutdown fight.[By blatantly lying and presenting false information.]
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/07/us/p ... visit.html
Last edited by Lord Jim on Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImageImage

Big RR
Posts: 14099
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Big RR »

If they do give him the time, I would hope they also permit a rebuttal. That could likely take th ewind out of his sails.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: To Shut Down Or Not To Shut Down...

Post by Lord Jim »

I would hope they also permit a rebuttal.
A rebuttal, and also a fact-check analysis. (Though traditionally, the audience that stays tuned for a rebuttal and analysis drops off a lot after the President finishes speaking. But of course these aren't traditional times...)
ImageImageImage

Post Reply