Cruz's "Filibuster"Follow

Ironically the Office of Government Ethics will be closed down as well; save 1 person, who I imagine will only be doing ethical things to their records.

Spending has nothing to do with passing a budget? That's news.

You get that making adjustments to spending on a whole set of government programs is part of the normal yearly budget process, right? One can presume that the entire reason why the Dems have avoided doing this for 4+ years is precisely because they don't want to go through a budget process where they might have to actually compromise on some of their spending. By passing continuing resolutions instead, they get to avoid having to justify the costs for all the things government is doing.

This is a normal process. It's supposed to be done every single year. Meaning every year, congress will debate (for example) how much money to allocate to something like Obamacare, or Medicare, or the Post Office, or whatever. Since a budget bill is a law, just like any other, that process allows congress to make adjustments to any existing law with regard to spending. This is normally done in conjunction with the White House so that they have some voice in terms of making sure the implementation of government programs isn't impacted (too much) by the budget process.

So basically, the white house kinda chooses which things are most important for them, and works with congress to make sure that those things get funded. And along the way there are lots of compromises made on all sides. The Democrats have avoided this for many years now, making it impossible to make any adjustments to spending at all (or at least significantly more difficult).

The GOP isn't doing anything unusual by trying to require some sort of spending compromise in return for funding the government. The Democrats have been doing something unusual for the last 4 years by effectively creating a "spend money on everything or nothing" condition. In other words, the Democrats have created this crisis, not the GOP. They've given the GOP only two options: Fund everything the Dems want, or fund nothing.



Lol! You're kidding right? It's the Democrats who have created that all or nothing condition. Not the GOP. It's the Democrats utter unwillingness to compromise on any spending at all for the last 4 years that has lead us to this condition. If they were willing to compromise, we'd have passed a budgets all along. Let me remind you that they did this even when they controlled both houses of congress. This is not about the GOP blocking the budget process. It is about the Democrats not wanting to make a budget because just passing "temporary" continuing resolutions allows them to get what they want without any scrutiny about what they're actually doing.



The precedent that we require both sides to sit down and hammer out a deal on spending with the cost of failure being a government shutdown? Um... That's *normal*. What's abnormal is not doing that and just passing continuing resolutions for 4 years instead.

Compromising and reaching a budget agreement is what congress is supposed to do every single year.



They want it gone. 55-60% of Americans want it gone. It's a broken piece of legislation that doesn't work even if you don't take into account the innate opposition to it due to its socialist nature. Um... But that's really beside the point. If the Dems really really really wanted Obamacare, they could work through a budget process to fit it in with all the other spending. Of course, they'd have to give up other things to make room for it. Which is why they've avoided the process.

It's not about funding or not funding Obamacare really. It's about the Democrats not wanting to have to lose anything to get it. They haven't even tried sitting down with Republicans and asking "What will it cost us to pay for this?". That's the problem.



We're working on it. Problem is that everyone knows that once you actually start implementing a law of that size, it becomes incredibly hard to repeal it because sufficient changes and costs and jobs are now associated with it.



They want it included in budget talks because normally every single federally funded program is included in budget talks every single year. What's been happening is the Dems have used some extreme measures to protect Obamacare from any sort of budget scrutiny or adjustment. So apparently they care more about forcing this piece of garbage down the throats of Americans than they care about the "faith and credit" of the US. That is their choice, not the GOPs.



It's not unrelated though. It's a continuing resolution that's being passed in lieu of having an actual budget. I don't think it's unreasonable at all to include discussions and negotiations that would normally be involved in a budget discussion within that discussion. Why would you think otherwise?

You know what would be unrelated? If someone argued that we should do something like end a war in Iraq or not pass a budget, with the threat of shutdown as a result. Want to know who voted to do just that in 2006? That would be President Obama. There's some serious hypocrisy.



What is the "core bill" though? Do you understand what is even on the table here? I really think you don't.



Except that it's not "do this or we choose to shut down the government as a separate action". Failing to pass a resolution automatically results in a government shutdown. It's not a choice being made. It's not like the GOP has some magical power to force the government to shut down anytime they want and then holds that over the heads of the Democrats. It is an automatic consequence of failing to have a budget. The continuing resolutions are a temporary measure to keep funding the government in the absence of a passed budget. What the Democrats are doing is saying "continue to fund everything or fund nothing". And if we fund nothing, the government shuts down.

They're the ones who have created this all or nothing condition. Not the GOP.

Why is that Democrats are blamed for not being willing to compromise, but Republicans get a pass for doing the same thing?

It's a little disconcerting how Cruz, Lee & Co can spend months talking about how they're going to shut down the government over Obamacare, then they shut down the government over Obamacare exactly as they said they would... and then Gbaji says how the shut down is all Democrats.

New political maths require 70-75% support for a min. Bill. 50>D>40% +>.5R.

I dub this the super sekret majority.

It's obvious, that's why Romney won the election.

Disconcerting, or predictable?

Can't it be both?

Isn't her seat pretty safe? I recall it being a seat the Democrats keep wishing they could pick off in a largely blue state but she remains popular and they never come close. She could be trying to avoid a primary challenge from the right or just trying to maintain some party line unity. Which could be cowardice or could be understanding that the fractured party is going to lose this fight. Or, you know, both.

A day or two after I told someone that, as far as GOP senators go, Kirk seemed to be doing an okay job and I could imagine a world where I favored him over a weak Democratic candidate, Kirk decided to vote against any sort of clean resolution, stand with defunding the ACA and is spending today leading WWII vets through the memorial. I'm as well disposed to WWII vets as anyone but somehow I think that tens of thousands of families not getting their paychecks should trump a photo-op with twenty old guys looking at some monuments.

I think it is not as safe as it has been thanks to our unpopular tea-party gov. Though I've not heard much rumblings of a strong candidate to run against her.

Well duh, literally everything wrong with the universe is the Democrat's fault.

Including all the in-fighting in the party. Totally the Dem's fault.

What I'm interested in seeing is what happens when the Tea Party are finally punted out of the GOP. Where will gbaji's loyalties lie?

I'm betting he's going to pretend he was ALWAYS on the side of the moderates, and that the Tea Partyers were subversive liberals who just wanted to mess things up.

- that was clearly and absolutely oversampled.

Just for the record this way really isn't any better.