The Government Shutdown, 2013 version.

rugcat · Sep 27, 2013

The Senate rejected the house budget bill stripping the ACA of funding, and sent back a "clean" bill to the House.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/28/u...d=2&adxnnlx=1380334458-iVpN/E7UkWkCqdqUk8LO5g

Will the house reject the Senate bill, resulting in a government shutdown? No one seem to know. My guess is that they will.

A government shutdown will be costly and bad for everyone, but it won't be catastrophic. But coming up soon. Oct 17th, is the debt ceiling fight. House republicans are again threatening that if Obamacare is not defunded, they will vote to default on the debt, throwing the US economy, and the world economy into chaos.

It looks like they are banking on the idea that such a move would be so catastrophic that Obama and the Dems will cave, rather than let the country plunge into another recession, or worse.

But Obama has made it clear he will not. Once you allow the opposition party to achieve their goals, goals they could not achieve through the legislative process, by means of extortion, the ability to govern at all vanishes.

It's unbelievable to me that it has come down to this over a disagreement over the way a health care bill has been crafted, but there you have it.

So, will the government shut down? And more important, will the House vote to default on the debt?

CrastersBabies · Sep 27, 2013

I honestly have no idea. The republicans have to know that:

1. This is as close to an act of terrorism as one can get (without actually calling it that). Holding the government (and its people) hostage in such a vindictive manner is deplorable. Terrorism thrives on fear. How is this not the worst kind of fear-mongering?
2. This will devastate the republican party. It already has. What few sane republican friends I have left have already decided to switch to independent status because they're sick of what their representatives have done to the party. Especially in this case. There's no way the republican party will come out on top in any way, shape or form. If they force a government shut-down, they're going to piss off half of the nation (Democrats) and a good chunk of those republicans who will be impacted as well--military to name a big one.

I don't see how they can deem this a move in the right direction. It's party suicide, imho.

But it is scary. If they cripple our nation over the ACA, then it's on them 100%.

Williebee · Sep 27, 2013

So, what's the possibility that the old guard, non-tea party Repubs and some Dems craft a way to align long enough to save themselves from the new Cruz party?

rugcat · Sep 27, 2013

Williebee said:
So, what's the possibility that the old guard, non-tea party Repubs and some Dems craft a way to align long enough to save themselves from the new Cruz party?

Well, that depends on the so-called Hastert rule. If Boehnor cannot get a majority of Republicans, 51%, to agree to go along with it, he won't bring it up for a vote.

Theoretically, if 49% of Republicans and 100% of Democrats all wanted to vote a certain way, it could never come up for a vote because Boehnor would not allow it.

No vote, no bill. The government then shuts down.

Williebee · Sep 27, 2013

That's weird. This time when you said it took twice as long as me. Usually it's the other way around.

thebloodfiend · Sep 27, 2013

Good luck to them. But can't they at least wait until after the 1st to throw their pitiful tantrums. No need to scare veterans and veteran dependents that we might not get paid because you want to be an idiot for a little while.

I can just see the military response if they screw with pay. It will not be pretty. If they do mess with my money, I will be pissed. Didn't they have a similar ridiculous fit last year, too, about something Obama did that they didn't like?

cornflake · Sep 27, 2013

Let's remember another time Republicans got together and decided to shut down the government over not getting their way in a budget battle.

muravyets · Sep 27, 2013

thebloodfiend said:
Good luck to them. But can't they at least wait until after the 1st to throw their pitiful tantrums. No need to scare veterans and veteran dependents that we might not get paid because you want to be an idiot for a little while.

I can just see the military response if they screw with pay. It will not be pretty. If they do mess with my money, I will be pissed. Didn't they have a similar ridiculous fit last year, too, about something Obama did that they didn't like?

Yes, and I believe that something was... wait for it... Obamacare!

They're nothing if not consistent. And frankly, they're not really consistent.

Re the OP: I have no idea if they're really going to go over the cliff this time. I wouldn't put it past the Republicans at this point. All I know is, they really need to cut this crap out.

benbradley · Sep 27, 2013

rugcat said:
A government shutdown will be costly and bad for everyone, but it won't be catastrophic. But coming up soon. Oct 17th, is the debt ceiling fight. House republicans are again threatening that if Obamacare is not defunded, they will vote to default on the debt, throwing the US economy, and the world economy into chaos.

I heard a little about the "debt ceiling" in the news, and no doubt we'll hear a lot more until/unless there's an agreement made.

I'm sure we (many of the P&CE regulars) have had this conversation before, but if something is "too big to fail," is it just plain too big?

LOG · Sep 27, 2013

CrastersBabies said:
I honestly have no idea. The republicans have to know that:

1. This is as close to an act of terrorism as one can get (without actually calling it that). Holding the government (and its people) hostage in such a vindictive manner is deplorable. Terrorism thrives on fear. How is this not the worst kind of fear-mongering?
2. This will devastate the republican party. It already has. What few sane republican friends I have left have already decided to switch to independent status because they're sick of what their representatives have done to the party. Especially in this case. There's no way the republican party will come out on top in any way, shape or form. If they force a government shut-down, they're going to piss off half of the nation (Democrats) and a good chunk of those republicans who will be impacted as well--military to name a big one.

I don't see how they can deem this a move in the right direction. It's party suicide, imho.

But it is scary. If they cripple our nation over the ACA, then it's on them 100%.

I wish I had more confidence in your second point, but our political system's structure means that come elections people will probably vote the same way(s) they always have.

blacbird · Sep 27, 2013

My prediction: It will, but not for very long. A few days, probably. The likely backlash will strike the Republicans much harder than the Democrats, much in the way it did back in the mid-1990s, when Bill Clinton stood up against this silliness. I don't see much about this bit of silly theater having changed since then.

caw

Death Wizard · Sep 27, 2013

If there is a shutdown, it will be the Republicans' fault. Anything else is just a bunch of fast-talking bull.

nighttimer · Sep 27, 2013

"Defund Obamacare or the Hostage Gets It!"

There's a negotiating tactic called "shoot the hostage" and as a phrase it has crept into the lexicon of Washington If you Google "Republicans" and "shoot the hostage" you can find some interesting reads.

If the government shuts down on Oct. 1, the GOP will “fold like hotcakes” in the fight to defund Obamacare, Sen. Tom Coburn said Friday afternoon before a critical set of votes.

The Oklahoma Republican said that after seven or eight days of shutdown the Republicans will begin to feel the heat from their constituents over lack of services back home, like pay for members of the military. To that end, Coburn explained that Republicans will not keep the government shuttered in order to defund Obamacare.

“The only time you shut down the government is when you shut it down and refuse to open it until you accomplish what you want. But we’ll fold like hotcakes,” Coburn told reporters. “You do not take a hostage you are not going to for sure shoot. And we will not for sure shoot this hostage.”

link

On Sunday, (Chris) Wallace told Heritage Foundation President Jim DeMint that some of his fellow Republicans had called that idea “suicidal” and “the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard.”

“What about the Republicans who say it’s crazy to hold the government funding hostage?” Wallace wondered.

“This is a very destructive law that’s going to hurt our country, it’s going to hurt a lot of people,” DeMint insisted. “This may be the last opportunity to stop it. Now, there’s no Republican that I’m aware of that wants to shut the government down. The whole point is we need to fund the government, but we should not fund Obamacare.”

“But, Senator, what they say, you know, is you don’t take a hostage unless you’re prepared to shoot him,” Wallace pointed out. “And if you’re going to go down this road, are you prepared to shut down the government? Because the Democrats are not going to go along with this.”

link

The next challenge will be the debt-limit deadline arriving in early March. Mr. Boehner says he wants a dollar in spending cuts (over 10 years) for every dollar increase in the debt limit. But Mr. Obama says he won’t even deign to negotiate over the debt limit, and in any case any spending cuts must come with more tax increases.

That may be a debt-limit bluff, but even if it is the GOP will have to show heretofore unseen determination to call that bluff. Mr. Obama will say Republicans are risking national default and recession, most of Wall Street will echo him, and the Treasury will maneuver to apply maximum political pressure—for example, by claiming it can’t pay Social Security benefits.

We’ll support efforts to cut spending and reform entitlements, but the political result will be far worse if Republicans start this fight only to cave in the end. You can’t take a hostage you aren’t prepared to shoot. Do the two GOP leaders have a better strategy today than they did in 2011, and do they have the backbench support to execute it?

link (1.14.13)

House Republicans are at a retreat in Williamsburg, Virginia (not the hipster Williamsburg) trying to figure out what to do about their political predicament in general and the debt ceiling in particular. Former Republican budget aide Keith Hennessey has an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal suggesting a kind of partial retreat from the party’s full-on hostage strategy of 2011. Republicans, he recognizes, can’t really threaten to block the debt ceiling. Instead, he suggests they threaten to block a long-term increase in the debt ceiling unless Obama gives in on spending. If Obama refuses, Hennessey suggests they just cough up a series of three-month debt ceiling hikes. Republicans are reportedly weighing this approach.

Will it work? You have to ask yourself what the point is. If Republicans can’t threaten to shoot the hostage, what do they gain by holding new debt ceiling votes every few months? It’s either leverage or it isn’t. If it isn’t, then a new vote every few months won’t do anything for the GOP. Indeed, it will annoy Republicans, who will be forced to take more and more “he voted to increase the debt ceiling fourteen times!” votes.

Hennessey’s analysis is less an argument than the expression of a party attempting to cope with loss. They thought they had a glorious opportunity to extract a ransom payment from Obama in return for not blowing up the world economy, and Hennessey’s plan is a kind of halfway point on the road to conceding that the debt ceiling will probably return to the old system of a mere posturing opportunity.

link (1.17.13)

Kevans · Sep 28, 2013

I follow a lot of forums, from both sides of the ideological divide.

On the conservative side there is a move to implement the ACA, as written, with no exceptions of any kind. The feeling is that once in place the pain will hit soon and the act will be dead by Nov. 2014.

The second big opinion is that since the Supreme Court declared the ACA as a tax, and because all tax bills must start in the House, the act has no legal merit, many thousands of law suits are prepared and awaiting the time when the filing entities have actually paid the tax, and will have legal standing to complain.

On a personal note my insurance premium has more than doubled from 2690.00 a year to 5538.00 a year since 2008. Further my son (works in food service) has had his hours cut to less than fifteen hours a week, and was told that there were lots of bodies out there that wanted his job.

My view is that government has been addicted to the big omnibus bill where lots of stuff (mostly pork) can be hidden inside the body of words. Accountability for the laws they pass is something both side are trying to avoid.

The Idea that your issues are negotiable, and mine are not, is the root of conflict for both parties in congress.

Regards,
Kevin

RichardGarfinkle · Sep 28, 2013

Kevans said:
I follow a lot of forums, from both sides of the ideological divide.

On the conservative side there is a move to implement the ACA, as written, with no exceptions of any kind. The feeling is that once in place the pain will hit soon and the act will be dead by Nov. 2014.

The second big opinion is that since the Supreme Court declared the ACA as a tax, and because all tax bills must start in the House, the act has no legal merit, many thousands of law suits are prepared and awaiting the time when the filing entities have actually paid the tax, and will have legal standing to complain.

On a personal note my insurance premium has more than doubled from 2690.00 a year to 5538.00 a year since 2008. Further my son (works in food service) has had his hours cut to less than fifteen hours a week, and was told that there were lots of bodies out there that wanted his job.

My view is that government has been addicted to the big omnibus bill where lots of stuff (mostly pork) can be hidden inside the body of words. Accountability for the laws they pass is something both side are trying to avoid.

The Idea that your issues are negotiable, and mine are not, is the root of conflict for both parties in congress.

Regards,
Kevin

Sorry, I'm having a hard time putting this together.

The ACA is an omnibus bill because it was an attempt to implement a complex solution to a complex problem. I would have preferred the simple solution (Medicare for all), but the US government is meant to be a complex inefficient mish-mash of competing interests so that's what we get.

Only the individual mandate was deemed to be a tax, not the entire ACA.

The personal notes are troubling, and I'm sorry to hear them, but are they actually arguments on any side.

I have heard people voice the idea that Obamacare is a failure because their personal insurance premiums have risen. By the way, when I was self employed I was often paying more than $10,000.00 a year.

Let's take your example.

2690.00 a year to 5538.00 a year since 2008.

This piece of information is
1. Out of context (since it would need a graph of your insurance rates covering a much longer period) to see whether this is unusual.

2. The wrong time period to argue against Obamacare since the act was only passed in 2010, and has not been fully implemented yet. Indeed, it is the fact that the insurance exchanges are due to start on October 1 of this year that may have been the initial impetus for the current frenzy.

3. A part of the purpose of the law is, in theory so far because it hasn't been implement, to curb the cost of insurance for most people. So, I don't know if this was your intent, but your information is data adding to the reason for the law.

The Idea that your issues are negotiable, and mine are not, is the root of conflict for both parties in congress.

I don't see any historical evidence for this claim. The root of conflict is disagreement on what government should do, and who it should benefit. That's what the root of conflict about government always is.

The existence of conflict in government isn't actually a problem. Conflict over ideas is part of the process of dialectic. Honest challenge can bring about a sharpening of ideas and a possible synthesis between antithetical notions.

But the challenge has to be honest, and the conflict needs to be over the ways to govern. Holding ones own nation hostage is not a way to govern.

dfwtinman · Sep 28, 2013

Long ago, when the earth was flat, a tall ship sailed straight for the abyss. Half the sailors of Amerigo bore the colors of Vermilion, half the colors of Azul.

On a prior voyage the sailors had agreed that, when the abyss loomed, the captain would steer a course to port. Amerigo's captain was bound to execute the wishes of her sailors.

But, on this voyage, Amerigo's sailors were no longer of one mind. As the abyss loomed, the sailors from Vermilion told the captain to chart a course to starboard. "Foul," cried the sailors from Azul,"it was settled before this voyage began. Hard-a-port!"

The shouting continued as the abyss drew near. From the crow's nest it was clear that either course, port or starboard, would avert disaster for all. If either side relented, doom would be avoided.

But, as night fell, they would not relent. And that's how morning for Amerigo became a mystery.

regdog · Sep 28, 2013

One of the biggest things that infuriates me about this. These pisser, moaners are pulling the "hold my breath" pouting routine that will cause the unpaid furlough of hundreds of thousands of federal workers, while those fuckers will still get their paychecks.

RichardGarfinkle · Sep 28, 2013

dfwtinman said:
Long ago, when the earth was flat, a tall ship sailed straight for the abyss. Half the sailors of Amerigo bore the colors of Vermilion, half the colors of Azul.

On a prior voyage the sailors had agreed that, when the abyss loomed, the captain would steer a course to port. Amerigo's captain was bound to execute the wishes of her sailors.

But, on this voyage, Amerigo's sailors were no longer of one mind. As the abyss loomed, the sailors from Vermilion told the captain to chart a course to starboard. "Foul," cried the sailors from Azul,"it was settled before this voyage began. Hard-a-port!"

The shouting continued as the abyss drew near. From the crow's nest it was clear that either course, port or starboard, would avert disaster for all. If either side relented, doom would be avoided.

But, as night fell, they would not relent. And that's how morning for Amerigo became a mystery.

Please demonstrate how either course would avert doom.

dfwtinman · Sep 28, 2013

RichardGarfinkle said:
Please demonstrate how either course would avert doom.

....it's just a story Richard. Which ending would you like?

ETA: Sorry, perhaps that's too flip. I might have posted conventional commentary. But the tale is what came to me. It was my design to avoid becoming entangled in policy arguments-- the world is in no short supply of those just now. It's an allegory. It may be apt or awful. But, it's still a story, and doesn't, imho, need defending.

Synonym · Sep 28, 2013

If the government shut down is the abyss, then port or starboard would have to be either the Republicans passing the bill without any language about defunding, or the Democrats agreeing to defund.

Am I missing something? Seems pretty obvious to me, which makes me nervous.

dfwtinman · Sep 28, 2013

Synonym said:
If the government shut down is the abyss, then port or starboard would have to be either the Republicans passing the bill without any language about defunding, or the Democrats agreeing to defund.

Am I missing something? Seems pretty obvious to me, which makes me nervous.

Nope.

Myrealana · Sep 28, 2013

The Affordable Care Act - love it or hate it - is the law of the land. It passed all three branches of the Federal Government to be put into law for all Americans.

Now, some grandstanders in the lower house of Congress want to hold the entire country hostage to their own agenda. In what world is that a reasonable position?

Williebee · Sep 28, 2013

However, our (US) history has shown us that the shutdown is more a set of rapids than an abyss. More time/room for political maneuvering and the pointing of fingers, rallying of citizens.

The Tea Party's candidates have seen some very visible success in more recent history by just such tactics. Perhaps that is the only history they are heeding.

Xelebes · Sep 28, 2013

Synonym said:
If the government shut down is the abyss, then port or starboard would have to be either the Republicans passing the bill without any language about defunding, or the Democrats agreeing to defund.

Am I missing something? Seems pretty obvious to me, which makes me nervous.

The biggest danger they are looking at is adding significantly the costs the government must look forward to. This harms both parties, but many of those looking to shutdown the government see their chest of policies as something that does not add costs or will continue to be feasible under a regime where the costs are significantly more.

raburrell · Sep 28, 2013

The 'will it or won't it' game is tipping pretty heavily towards a shutdown this morning:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/house-gop-budget-strategy-government-shutdown-97496.html

As of Saturday morning, top GOP sources said the most likely scenario was that the House would pass a CR this weekend that would delay Obamacare for one year. That move would, almost certainly, result in a government shutdown. Republicans could avoid a shutdown by passing a short-term CR, which would allow more time for negotiations. They could also take up the Senate’s bill, which Republican leaders have said is unlikely.

Rather tired of the hostage game they're playing, personally.

The Government Shutdown, 2013 version.

Lost in the Fog

Burninator!

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

Lost in the Fog

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

Cory

practical experience, FTW

Old revolutionary

It's a doggy dog world

Lagrangian

Tumhe na koci puujetha

No Gods No Masters

Fish from another stream

Nurture Phoenixes

Cubic Zirconia in the rough

The Scavengers

Nurture Phoenixes

Cubic Zirconia in the rough

Cubic Zirconia in the rough

I aim to misbehave

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

Delerium ex Ennui

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee