Government Shutdown

[nickagneta]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

[FatKidsDad]

This is what the President had to say about the 2013 shutdown:

“Well, if you say who gets fired it always has to be the top,” Trump said. “I mean, problems start from the top and they have to get solved from the top and the president’s the leader. And he’s got to get everybody in a room and he’s got to lead.”

He said that further down in history, “when they talk about the government shutdown, they’re going to be talking about the president of the United States, who the president was at that time.”

“They’re not going to be talking about who was the head of the House, the head the Senate, who’s running things in Washington,” Trump said.

“So I really think the pressure is on the president,” he added.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/369756-trumps-comments-blaming-obama-for-2013-government-shutdown-resurface

So What!  T
It's sound like your more interested in Trump going down, rather than 9million legal  kids receiving The Child Health Insurance Program.

Those issues back in 2013 had to do with budgetary issues.  Right now, the dems are holding out for non budgetary issues like DACA. They won't fund the government unless they have a clean DACA deal which has nothing to do with paycheck. Trump can't do anything, if the Democrats are being unreasonable.

Sounds like I'm more interested in Trump going down? How did you jump to THAT conclusion? I quoted the man without comment. I wrote nothing about CHIP. I didn't reference DACA. I didn't discuss the circumstances from 2013.

I posted a quote that started with the unconditional statement “Well, if you say who gets fired it always has to be the top,”

[Fan from VT]

If republicans cared about CHIP it would be done months ago. They do not care about CHIP or the children if affects; they care that it is a hugely popular affordable program that they can use as leverage to try to ram through other distasteful things.

[Roy H.]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Is this whataboutism?  It seems like that’s the new cry to shout down legit arguments.

To answer your question: it’s hyper-hypocritical by both sides.  But, Dems also deserve blame here, just like Republicans did before.

My proposal: a Constitutional amendment that severely limits CRs (maybe a max of two per term, up to two weeks each), plus a requirement that the budget be signed annually. Members of Congress during any session where a budget is not passed on time lose: their pay for the period of shutdown, a 2x loss of tenure for pensions, etc. during the shutdown time, and no campaigning activities for a period twice the amount of the shutdown, to be enforced immediately before their next election.

So, a 14 day shutdown equals 14 days pay (pro-rated upon days in session, rather than 365 days), a 28 day loss of tenure, and no campaigning for 28 days before their next Election Day.

[Roy H.]

Looks like McConnell had 50 votes after all.

The official vote count was 50-49. Sen. John McCain of Arizona is recuperating from cancer treatments and was not present for the vote.

The vote was along party lines, except for several Democrat defectors from red states, Senators Doug Jones (Alabama), Claire McCaskill (Missouri), Heidi Heitkamp (N. Dakota), Joe Donnelly (Indiana), and Joe Manchin (W. Virginia), and Republicans Senators Lindsey Graham (S. Carolina), Jeff Flake (Arizona), Mike Lee (Utah), and Rand Paul (Kentucky).

[FatKidsDad]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Is this whataboutism?  It seems like that’s the new cry to shout down legit arguments.

To answer your question: it’s hyper-hypocritical by both sides.  But, Dems also deserve blame here, just like Republicans did before.

My proposal: a Constitutional amendment that severely limits CRs (maybe a max of two per term, up to two weeks each), plus a requirement that the budget be signed annually. Members of Congress during any session where a budget is not passed on time lose: their pay for the period of shutdown, a 2x loss of tenure for pensions, etc. during the shutdown time, and no campaigning activities for a period twice the amount of the shutdown, to be enforced immediately before their next election.

So, a 14 day shutdown equals 14 days pay (pro-rated upon days in session, rather than 365 days), a 28 day loss of tenure, and no campaigning for 28 days before their next Election Day.

Good luck getting 2/3 of the same people who caused this debacle to sign off on that proposal. Likewise reaching the threshold to call for a constitutional convention.

As a former boss once told me, it's not the right answer, but I like the way you think.

[Celtics4ever]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

It was wrong then and it was wrong now.   We can't continue to do business like this....   It's childish and immature when either side does it. 

If you're referring to me, I was highly critical when the GOP did it Pres. Obama.  I think it is the wrong way to do business for either party.

My proposal: a Constitutional amendment that severely limits CRs (maybe a max of two per term, up to two weeks each), plus a requirement that the budget be signed annually. Members of Congress during any session where a budget is not passed on time lose: their pay for the period of shutdown, a 2x loss of tenure for pensions, etc. during the shutdown time, and no campaigning activities for a period twice the amount of the shutdown, to be enforced immediately before their next election.

I love this idea, you or I would get fired if we did not do our job. But in all honesty, Congress never votes to lessen its pay or the like.   I think we the voter ought to vote on their pay raises, too.

Life will go on even if there is a shutdown.   The panic mongers will love this and have a field day.

[Erik]

Its surprising to me that we're debating deporting a DACA or creating a path to citizenship when the initial problem of illegal immigration is still not solved. Do you also clean up the water from the overflowing toilet before shutting off the water? Whatever considerations you give to a DACA needs to be established after securing the border for good as to not have policy fuel more illegal immigration. I'm fine with keeping them here until then.

[Erik]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Just as much as I hate that people forgot that before it was  whataboutism for Obama it was for Bush by the left. The same story is just on alternating repeat and it drives me crazy that it keeps getting forgotten. Maybe both sides can wake up and elect an independent that will be focused on the correct solutions for the country instead of focusing on what will get them reelected.

[tazzmaniac]

Its surprising to me that we're debating deporting a DACA or creating a path to citizenship when the initial problem of illegal immigration is still not solved. Do you also clean up the water from the overflowing toilet before shutting off the water? Whatever considerations you give to a DACA needs to be established after securing the border for good as to not have policy fuel more illegal immigration. I'm fine with keeping them here until then.

Not sure what you mean by "securing the border for good".  You're never going to be able to stop all illegal immigration.  DACA and the overall illegal immigration issue needs to be worked together.  There should be no issue with the policy fueling more illegal immigration because it would only apply to illegal immigrants that could prove they were already in the US before a certain date. 

[chilidawg]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Just as much as I hate that people forgot that before it was  whataboutism for Obama it was for Bush by the left. The same story is just on alternating repeat and it drives me crazy that it keeps getting forgotten. Maybe both sides can wake up and elect an independent that will be focused on the correct solutions for the country instead of focusing on what will get them reelected.

Agree with you here, with the caveat that the "correct" solutions are a matter of opinion, and it's pretty clear that the country is very divided on what the correct solutions are.

[Neurotic Guy]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Just as much as I hate that people forgot that before it was  whataboutism for Obama it was for Bush by the left. The same story is just on alternating repeat and it drives me crazy that it keeps getting forgotten. Maybe both sides can wake up and elect an independent that will be focused on the correct solutions for the country instead of focusing on what will get them reelected.

Here are a few independents/moderates who could bring reason and confidence back to the WH:
John Kasich
Angus King
Joe Manchin
Mark Warner
Lindsey Graham
Rob Portman

[tazzmaniac]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Just as much as I hate that people forgot that before it was  whataboutism for Obama it was for Bush by the left. The same story is just on alternating repeat and it drives me crazy that it keeps getting forgotten. Maybe both sides can wake up and elect an independent that will be focused on the correct solutions for the country instead of focusing on what will get them reelected.

Electing an independent wouldn't solve anything.  Trump is essentially an independent.  Sanders is an independent except when being a part of the democratic party benefits him. 

The problem is the virtual elimination of moderates from both parties.  Moderation and compromise are seen negatively.  The extremes are running the show and dominating the conversation.  The news media fuels the situation because moderation is boring and doesn't drive ratings.  Elected politicians from both parties draw the election maps to ensure almost all of the districts are safe (i.e. on one extreme or the other).

[Erik]

Its surprising to me that we're debating deporting a DACA or creating a path to citizenship when the initial problem of illegal immigration is still not solved. Do you also clean up the water from the overflowing toilet before shutting off the water? Whatever considerations you give to a DACA needs to be established after securing the border for good as to not have policy fuel more illegal immigration. I'm fine with keeping them here until then.

Not sure what you mean by "securing the border for good".  You're never going to be able to stop all illegal immigration.  DACA and the overall illegal immigration issue needs to be worked together.  There should be no issue with the policy fueling more illegal immigration because it would only apply to illegal immigrants that could prove they were already in the US before a certain date.

If you put an exception for one group of people, it stands a logical test that we'll repeat the same courtesy for the next batch. It's kind of like negotiating with terrorists in the sense that if you do it once you'll do it always. Best case scenario in my opinion is to secure the border as much as possible (shoot to kill if you have to) and then keep the DACAs and their families here, make them pay penalties, whatever taxes they didn't pay over their time but do not ever allow citizenship for them. We're partially to blame for their illegal immigration because we've been soft on it with this catch and release method. Just shoot them dead as you would a trespasser and they'll stop coming. They are not citizens and could be dangerous. We are only protecting our borders so no human rights violations.

[KGs Knee]

I hate what is happening in Washington right now but can anyone on the right really be critical of those on the left now after the right's 6 years of obstructionist governing under Obama that included a government shutdown? Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Is this whataboutism?  It seems like that’s the new cry to shout down legit arguments.

To answer your question: it’s hyper-hypocritical by both sides.  But, Dems also deserve blame here, just like Republicans did before.

My proposal: a Constitutional amendment that severely limits CRs (maybe a max of two per term, up to two weeks each), plus a requirement that the budget be signed annually. Members of Congress during any session where a budget is not passed on time lose: their pay for the period of shutdown, a 2x loss of tenure for pensions, etc. during the shutdown time, and no campaigning activities for a period twice the amount of the shutdown, to be enforced immediately before their next election.

So, a 14 day shutdown equals 14 days pay (pro-rated upon days in session, rather than 365 days), a 28 day loss of tenure, and no campaigning for 28 days before their next Election Day.

It 100% is what many have been calling whataboutism as of late. But you both are right that it is hypocritical of Reps who are blaming Dems now, but were okay with Reps who did it before. Hypocrisy should always be pointed out. Hopefully people can see that now and drop the nonsensical whataboutism cry.

But most of all, I find it terribly disturbing Congress can so callously use people's lives as a bargaining chip in their political game of chicken. It really doesn't matter to me where you stand on DACA.