Front Page  »  

Impasse by federal lawmakers could result in a shutdown

September 2, 2013

moneyA group of Senate Republicans that had been trying to work out a potential compromise with the White House on the federal debt and annual deficits suspended its efforts on Thursday, saying it had reached an impasse. [LATimes]

With a new federal fiscal year starting on Oct 1, conservative and liberal lawmakers are digging in their heals which could result in the shutdown of funding for some departments and agencies.

The GOP controlled house wants to abide with the Budget Control Act of 2011 which requires an equal split between defense and non-defense spending. The Democrat run Senate wants to revoke sequester cuts in the 2011 law and make sure domestic expenditures are not sacrificed to pay for defense spending.

If the two sides are unable to come to a compromise, economic fallout like that seen in 1995 is expected.

The Senate and House are approximately $100 billion apart on total spending for the coming fiscal year. Even if they compromise on the total spending budget, the sides are split on changes to health care and other mandatory spending programs.

 


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


39 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wow, you couldn’t be more wrong; I have a small pension, period. I do draw any Social Security (yet) which I have paid into for over 30 years; I do not receive any sort of assistance from any government agency be it local, county, state or federal, period.

It is telling however, that you think that any social programs are “progressive”; are you aware that there are more people, as a percentage of the population, that receive “government assistance” in the so-called “red states” then there are in the blue states? I’ll wager that you might be an Ayn Rand fan; are you aware that this bastion of libertarianism received both Social Security and Medicare at the end of her life? And you want to end a “government gravy train”, how about all of the tax breaks for oil companies, other “energy” producers as well as the gravy train of all of the defense contractors?

If one wants to state that our country is broke, how about owning up to who it is that put us in this position? First clue; it is NOT Social Security that has caused us to spend more than we take in …


0

Alan Greenspan remained faithful to Ayn Rand sort of. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Greenspan#Objectivism


0

So your argument against one who wants limited or no government social programs is to point out how many people are on them? Interesting.


0

It is rather amazing to me that we have citizens of the United States of America calling for the government to fail; my guess is you don’t actually realize what that would do to our economy, the world economy, political stability all over the world, and how many people would suffer, needlessly. Perhaps you just don’t care, or you think that your bunker filled with freeze dried foods and all your ammunition is what is going to “save you”; that is beyond sad.

Our government is not perfect, there is definitely room to improve the functionality and streamline many government functions, but I just cannot understand how it is many seem to think the best way to achieve any improvements is to tear the whole thing down. Do you realize how many opportunists will move in to make a profit off of the suffering of those less fortunate?

I want a government that functions well; regulation where it is most effective in protecting the majority of citizens but not over bearing and cumbersome – the ability to make sure the citizens are safe from those who wish to harm our nation, either from abroad or domestically, without taking away any of our Constitutionally protected rights – support for those less fortunate or those who lack the ability to provide for themselves, without causing those of modest means to have to pay more than their share of the societal costs – to provide that all citizens have the ability to participate in the choosing of our elected officials without undue restrictions on who can vote, yet still protect the sanctity of the ballot to make sure there is no subversion of the intention of the voters – to provide and maintain the infrastructure, both physical and electronic that allows individuals and businesses to conduct trade and be able to move freely around our nation without the fear of bridges falling down and without cronyism and nepotism rewarding those seek to fulfill the needs of such construction and maintenance.

I realize there is more to what a government should be than what I have listed, but what I am interested in here is a response by someone who can give a clear, concise, cogent argument as to why it is in anyone’s best interest for out government to shut down (even temporarily) or to fail outright. Anyone?


0

Bob, very well written…concise and to the point.


You make some errors, though: You write in complete thoughts, and use words of more than one or two syllables.

On top of it all, you are attempting to communicate with others that are stuck in denial, stupid and proud of it, and impervious to reason.

This is such a clear case of Cranial-Rectal-Embedment, or CRE as Dr. Berman phrased it.

Their heads are firmly implanted in another part of their anatomy, and they think the view is wonderful.

Arguing with them, or trying to, is a futile waste of time.


0

SF: In reading r0y’s nonsense next to your reply, I think you may be correct in your assessment of the conservative mindset. I would seriously like to dialog with a die-hard conservative if they would be tolerant enough to drop the name calling and knee-jerk reactions long enough to have a conversation; I’m sure that we could both learn something. I know that I do not have all the answers, but I also feel that many of the actions I would like to see our government take now have worked in the past and helped pull our country up and raise the standard of living of a majority of citizens; far too many special interests put their agenda ahead of what is best for the rest of us however, and we end up like we are now.


0

“I’m sure that we could both learn something.”


Bob..the “conservative” won’t learn anything. They don’t want to. They hate actual facts and science, and rebel violently against anything remotely resembling education.


My advice to you ? Don’t be a Pollyanna…Realize that they are dimwits that would sooner kill you than have a conversation, and deal with it accordingly.


0

Your biggest problem (among MANY), bob, is that you completely and totally fail to grasp the arguments. Instead, you apply YOUR OWN, incorrect assumptions as framing of the argument (i.e. “citizens calling for the government to fail”). You misinterpret pretty much anyone who does not align with your narrow, ideological views and promptly set out to analyze your incorrect understanding of what is being said. Further, you also constantly (to a frightening level) apply your own narrow, old-fashioned, failed world viewpoints as the only viewpoint possible (akin to calling man-made global warming solid facts and needing no more scientific inquiry). While all of this is likely to be beyond your understanding at this point, I continue so that others who may not be privy to your tirades may glimpse into your projected persona.


As is typical of rabid ideologues, you will ask a question and humbly ask for a “clear, concise, cogent argument” – but should that response or argument not align with your per-conditioned, programmed ideology, you quickly snap back, completely disregard, and re-frame another question. This seems like a shared psychosis among “progressive left” people (i.e. the ones who hijacked the Democrat party). In short, there is no dialogue possible with you, bob. It is like trying to tell a child, “No, Billy, the sky is NOT red, it is blue” then having the kid throw a tantrum, attacking the person who will not reinforce the false notion of a red sky.


I appreciate your attempts, but as is the case that is happening all over, even other “leftists” are realizing the zealots have not only hijacked and infested their party, but are becoming more and more unstable. You are amounting to little more than a spoiled child who reads that his personal, little world that you’ve subscribed to all along is actually not working out as promised by all the indoctrination and propaganda you’ve been subjected to your entire life.


Mainstream news is dying FAST. Newspapers, magazines, television. The single, controlled dissemination which successfully worked on you is not having the same impact anymore. People have been waking up, and will continue to do so. This must really frustrate you.


The simple truth is, you want a government that can provide everything (magically?) for everyone and utopia is only a few more programs and regulations away. The harsh reality is what pisses off the left: it does not work, never has, never will. This anger has to be channeled somewhere, so the minority party will have to do (or anyone who you perceive as not agreeing with you). It truly is sad to watch good folks such as you self-destruct over the simplest of issues. I really wish it wasn’t so.


The evidence is all around you. I’m not talking some lefty site that still blames Bush for whatever, I’m talking about REALITY around you. Look at your own town’s government. Even if you believe NOTHING reported (again, and again, and again) on CCN, how’s SLO’s budget look? How’s the job market here? How’s the homeless situation? You’ve been here a while, have things improved? Who’s been running the show? I’m sure you know what parties the people running SLO are, but if you asked “the man on the street” – I’m pretty certain they would not be able to tell the difference.


Government is corrupt, bob. You should not want more of it, and it’s borderline psychotic to think that it will solve anything.


0

What a bunch of malarkey, blarney, balderdash, or in increasingly less euphemism: fertilizer, merde, manure …shal I continue ?


Republicans have no intention to compromise, or do anything to actually help or assist in governing.

They’re the small town and small mind haters of everything.

They’ve been AGAINST every modern government program ever proposed or enacted for at least the last 100 years. They just can’t think, and don’t want anyone else to, either.


They’re racists, jingoists, nationalists, xenophobes, bigots, plutocrats, and overall…the kind of people that civilized societies eventually decide to get rid of; one way or another.


0

” …the kind of people that civilized societies eventually decide to get rid of; one way or another.”


How very ‘progressive’ of you.


This show what will happen when leftists gain more power. Zyklon-B for those that disagree.


0

Yes, progressive just like FDR, Steinbeck, Omar Bradley, and others of their ‘progressive’ attitude had to be the ones that dealt with the fascists.


A sizeable number of reactionary Republicans of the day like Carles Lindburgh, Prescott Bush, wanted to either hide, or side up with the Nazi’s.

There were some honorable Republicans back then: Wendell Willkie, Fiorello LaGuardia, Thomas Dewey that were also ‘progressive’ That joined with their Democratic counterparts. These were liberal, what came to be later termed “Rockefeller Republicans”.

How many of those exist now ?


0

Lol, if you think FDR (who was a huge progressive) was the one that dealt with the fascists, you obviously do not know your HISTORY (and that’s just a place to start).


Yikes, this is why education is so critical.


0

There really is no adequate, polite way to respond to such fatuous nonsense…but here is just one example of what FDR had to say about the Nazis and Axis powers in 1940:


archives.nbclearn.com/portal/site/k-12/flatview?cuecard=1279


0

This is where we part ways. You provided a quote of words, I provided the man who actually DID something. Ironically, he did it because FDR came begging to him after he previously vilified and tried to personally destroy this man. Who’s the better man?


Of course you have no adequate or polite way to respond. This often happens when one is faced with the harsh realities of history trampling all over their perceived notions of a misinterpreted / misunderstood past.


0

PS: If you’re still confused as to who “Big” Bill Knudsen was, try reading about General Marshall who had to take FDR to the woodshed:

“It’s time to get serious about arming America for war. If you don’t do something, and do it right now, I don’t know what’s going to happen to our country.”

Go ahead. Crack a book. Follow a link. Learn. Please.


0

Says the Democrat who claims his gang is highly educated, well spoken, and accepting of all of mankind.

Typical douchbag big mouth, whiney, my way or no way Democrat prick. Recon you were saving those names for a comeback by one of us Rebublicans..LOL.


0

if i were ‘saving’ names for Republicans, i would use ones that they might be aware of …like Curly , Larry, and Moe.


So many worthy recipients of a Darwin Award in this thread ! It is vexing to decide who is more deserving.


0

Liberty != Government spending.


How many bastions of liberal spending cities nationwide have to go bankrupt before everyone realizes that government is out of control?


Sooner or later liberals always run out of other people’s money. I see no problem with stopping that sooner rather than later.


.


0

You, my wise friend, understand this exactly right!


Not only does government spending NOT EQUAL liberty, but it is, in fact, a DETRIMENT to liberties.


The short version (I’ve already done my wall of text comments for the day) is:


What “RIGHT” does someone have to another’s LABOR?


Right to Healthcare? That means some doctor somewhere has to provide a good or service to another, without compensation. This is called SLAVERY.


I’d expand further, but I think you know precisely where I’m coming from, and if someone reading this does not, well… let me know, and I’ll try my best in a reply.


0

THIS IS FANTASTIC NEWS!! I sure hope the shutdown lasts a GOOD, LONG TIME! Wow, we might actually get a boost to our economy! I know it’s too much to hope for, but here’s to wishing it’s more than just “non-essential personnel” that are told to stay home (or golf, go to the mall, etc). Since they probably will get paid at a later date via a crappy bill (like last time in 1995 when these shenanigans were pulled).


Although bob’s post seems to decry otherwise, I still have hope that most people are smart enough this time around to recognize this stupidity for what it is. Call their bluff: SHUT THEM DOWN! I bet we could lay off HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of non-essential government employees (I’m hesitant to call them workers, as that denotes actual work is done). Force them to work in the economy they have so abused in the last 60 years. Well, give them the option to try and work in it.


We need to be about OPPORTUNITY and not about GUARANTEES. It’s just that simple.


0

Oh..pure, unadulterated BALONEY !


“OPPORTUNITY” as you put it , is a false construct …a theory put forth to continue the charade of a mythical dream world that keeps millions in subjection and abject poverty.


These anti-government objectivists that are now the Republican party would turn this nation into a feudal/slave state where every man, woman, and child would have to claw and fight for mere existence.

This party, and its agenda, can only be defined as UNCIVILIZED.


However, sometimes i hope that these issues come to fruition…because it just might wake up a deluded and narcotized proletariat to recognize just who their enemies really are, and finally do something about it.

I guess I’m an idealist.


0

Opportunity is a false construct? It is at this time you are tuned out.


…and I thought only gas came out of that end…


0

So the Republicans want to shut down the government because we are not cutting domestic programs enough; this is news? No, this is their mantra: “Government cannot do the job” so they set about making sure that government cannot do the job; is that really any surprise?

I’m sure that many will assume that I would believe that government can do everything and do it well; that would be a wrong assumption. Government can do many things, even do a few of them very well, but certainly cannot “do” everything. I just think that we should be electing people to Congress that want to make the function of government to be efficient and accountable; I do realize that President Obama has failed on his promises to be more accountable, so believe me when I say that Democrats have much to answer for in how badly some of our government functions do not perform as well as they could, but at least the mantra of the Democrats isn’t “government sucks” . Why not work to make it better instead of trying to tear it down?


0

Bob, your liberal partisanship as usual makes me laugh. The article starts with the line……….


A group of Senate Republicans that had been trying to work out a potential compromise with the White House on the federal debt………..


They said compromise but all you heard is………THOSE EVIL REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO SHUT DOWN GOVERNMENT!!


Your second paragraph I do find some sense in, that yes both sides aren’t doing us much good.


0

Why am I not surprised that you did not finish the rest of that first sentence?

“A group of Senate Republicans that had been trying to work out a potential compromise with the White House on the federal debt and annual deficits suspended its efforts on Thursday, saying it had reached an impasse.( and yes, I added the bold face type and italics to highlight the rest of the sentence that you chose not to print; isn’t “suspending” just another, nicer way to say that they have taken their ball and gone away? Given the recent history of the Republicans in Congress though, it shouldn’t be too much of surprise when they say that they could NOT work out a compromise – during the Republican heyday of 2002 through 2006, compromise to the Republicans meant “doing it our way, period.” Politics is supposed to be the art of compromise; how can that be allowed to function properly if one side is completely unwilling to budge one inch off of their talking points?


0

Bob again you missed the mark. YOUR COMMENT Republicans WANT to shut down the Government.


Trying to TALK and REACH a COMPROMISE doesn’t sound like they wanted to shut down the Government. It was when they reached an IMPASSE that they had no other choice.


Try again Bob. Bob I find that every time something political comes up, you can’t wait to post bashing the republicans. Again your biased, we get.


0

Do you believe, for one nano second, that Republicans think that government should be run well and be successful? Where would your proof of that assertion be? My “belief” that Republicans do not want government to be successful is founded upon the factual evidence of how the Republicans behave when they have control of a legislative body. Like I mentioned before, when the Republicans had the White House, The House and the Senate, they ran the legislature with an iron fist; compromise was not in the vocabulary. If the Republicans back then wanted to push something through, they did not consult with the Democratic legislators as a group; they would approach a few of the more conservative Democrats, but mostly they steamrolled whatever they wanted to do without regard for any opposing points of view. The Republicans in Washington cannot seem to grasp that the voters don’t want the bickering, the petty differences, they want to see positive results.

Have there been very many jobs bills offered up by the Republicans in the House (that were not defense industry or energy industry related)? Not really, but there have been some 39 attempts to recall the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare); does that really sound like politicians who are serious about compromise and getting the job done?

Every thing the Washington Republicans in office do is an attempt to make President Obama look ineffective, to make sure that his administration does not get any credit for anything positive for the country, period. That is my belief based on the evidence of the history of what is NOT getting done by the Republican leadership in Washington. I am well aware that many old-school Republicans chaff at my suggestions that the leadership of the Republican Party are not interested in compromise in any meaningful way, but look at the track record of your party and show me some evidence that I am wrong. You have your beliefs that the Republicans want to make America strong and great and a shining beacon for the world to emulate, show me some evidence that that is what they are working for.


0

And the democrats have had control of California for decades and look at the shape our state is in. How would you explain this? likely something along the lines of the minority of Republicans keeping the democrats from doing what they want.


So first it seems you claim that when the republicans are in control they are responsible for any problems, then you say when democrats are in control its the few republicans that stop everything and so they are responsible for any problems. Works out nicely for you.


So at any time are the democrats responsible for any problems, as far as you are concerned? guessing not.


0

The article is dealing with the mess in Washington, not California, not Stockton or Detroit, the whole of the United States of America. Do the Democrats have “any” blame? Yes. During the time between President Obama’s election and the election of 2010, there was for the briefest of moments, a true Democratic majority in the House and the Senate, but there was, IMO, too much timidity exercised by the Democrats. There was not, however, a true complete majority for the entire 2 years as is commonly reported by most in the media.

Have the Democrats also contributed to our poor state of the union otherwise? Yes again; too much spending slathered on the Defense industry, not enough focus on job creation, not enough enforcement of the Wall Street casino and too many give aways to big business that did not protect American jobs.

Can anything be done to make our economy stronger? Yes, it calls for political will, something the Democrats seem too timid to exercise when they have the majorities, and something the Republicans would never do as long as there is a Democrat in the White House.


0

Bobfsl …check out Dr. Morris Berman. He has it correct.

98% of Americans are too stupid and we are on the downward path of failed empire.


Republicans in the USA today are just fascists with a convenient nickname.

Democrats are scardey-cat functionaries and equivocators ( with few exceptions ).


Best thing to do is to do nothing to stop it, and move to another country if you can.


0

Bob,

If you look nationwide at all the failing cities and states, they are all run and controlled by members of the democratic party. If we spend all of the money and borrow the rest there will be no money left to help the truly in need. We are a ship heading to the rocks if people cannot and will not accept that personal responsibility is the key to a successful representative republic. As a government employee myself I see that government is not the answer.


0

Yea Detroit is one city that comes to mind. What say you Bob?


0

Bob you are spinning it as only one party that is responsible. I see it pretty even. One example here…………..


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3445_162-57544832/this-retiring-congressmans-crime-compromise/


0

Isn’t it funny how liberals think “compromise” means doing it 100% their way?


0

Example?


0

Politics in this country and every state.


You’re welcome.


0

r0y: I hate to have to educate you, but your “example” is just your belief that politics is this country and every state is controlled with an iron fist by the Democrats, apparently- shelworth made the assertion that to liberals, “compromise” means doing it their way 100%; I asked for a specific example, you did not deliver. Do you have a specific example of liberals not willing to compromise in any way that you can link to via an accredited news site or a public record of a government report that you can point to as evidence to back up the assertion?

Earlier in the thread I made the specific, detailed mention of how when the Republicans had control of the White House, The Senate and The House, they were not interested in compromise in any form; if anyone doubts my assertion of that time frame, I will pull up a link to a news site that has a report of such behavior. Link here to an article from this year about how Republicans have no incentive to compromise; please, if you are serious about thinking that the lack of compromise in Washington is the fault of the Democrats, read the linked article and educate yourself.


0

Don’t worry, bob, you do not educate anyone. Particularly yourself.


Thanks for demonstrating EXACTLY what my wall-of-text reply to you above indicates: You replace any view you do not like with one completely fabricated by yourself (in this case, you claim I believe democrats control politics with an iron fist; when, in fact, I was reply to the comment about liberals not understanding compromise. Quite a jump, even for you, bob).


I then provided two examples: All politics, and every state in this union. Both of which you do not agree with, but instead of manning up and just saying that, you claim nothing was provided. This is delusional, bob. Get help.


Your entire world is about Democrats and Republicans, and many people have simply moved on, bob. It’s not the 1900’s anymore. I can recognize that instead of D vs. R we now have Progressives/Authoritarians/Statists vs. Libertarians/Conservatives. The game board has changed right under your feet bob. Perhaps this helps explain why you’re so bitter and small in your rants of late. Change is a hard thing to swallow… but then, again, didn’t you vote for it? I sure Hope so.


0

Well, this is a pretty fine example, actually. One does not arrive at an IMPASSE unilaterally. Refusal to negotiate at all means that there’s a problem. I certainly fault both sides in their inability to reach a compromise, but it does reflect poorly upon the liberals that they are trying to, in effect, get around the Budget Control Act of 2011. Why are they insisting on not following the law? Why take that position?


Why are BOTH SIDES spending money we do not have to the point where we nearly cannot pay the interest?


This is not good.


0