Looming budget battle: Will the GOP force federal shutdown (2 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

    superchuck500

    U.S. Blues
    Joined
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages
    6,039
    Reaction score
    15,278
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Offline
    Annual federal appropriations will lapse on September 30, 2023 - now less than a month away. After the debt-ceiling fight, many anticipated that the FY 2024 funding battle could see a federal government shutdown of some length as Republicans push for more budget cuts . . . and that was before Special Counsel Jack Smith's office filed two separate criminal prosecutions of Donald Trump. Desperate to hit back in any way they can, the MAGAs in Congress have already said they will attempt to de-fund the prosecution. Of course, the only way they could even attempt to do that would be to force a shutdown of the entire federal government, or at least the civilian executive agencies presuming a bill funding DOD could get through.

    It's hard to imagine that they won't try this, the questions are when will they try it and how much of the GOP goes along with the MAGAs (i.e. Freedom Caucus), particularly in the Senate where McConnell has already indicated no interest in such a gambit . . . though McConnell's health may eventually come into play. Would, for example, the Republicans agree to a continuing resolution to fund the government for several months to allow the time to get closer to the Trump federal trial dates before actually attempting a shutdown? (March 4 in DC and May 20 in Florida).

    One factor in play is that federal funding rules allow the Article III courts (which include the federal district and appellate courts) to continue operation in a shutdown and they also allow for federal agencies to continue with "excepted" activities that include, generally, federal criminal prosecutions. (See article below). This allowance, however, is not perpetual, it is funded by other sources that do eventually dry up - so eventually they would shut down. Hypothetically, but such a lengthy shutdown would be terribly detrimental to the economy and have substantial political damage for the party perceived to have caused it . . . in this case that wouldn't be much of a debate.

    For those reasons, I think the smarter GOP leaders, particularly in the Senate, will recognized that trying to use the budget as a tool to harm the Trump prosecutions is a fool's game: it's almost certain not to achieve that goal and it's to bring about substantial harm. But the MAGAs aren't as smart and given their wild allegiance to Trump, we can expect some sort of effort. At minimum it gives them an ability to say to their MAGA constituents that they tried to shutdown the prosecutions but were sold out by the RINOs in the Senate.

    Going to be an interesting showdown. I don't think I can recall a shutdown battle where actually shutting the government down so that it couldn't function was the objective rather than a tool for coercion. Crazy.



     
    I know Republicans are not being genuine about a fear of voter fraud, but that shouldn't stop us from continuing to improve the process to eliminate the little that there is. I agree that IDs must be free, and I think it is a good compromise to have free voter registration methods available on site or assure that IDs are offered 24/7 the week before the election and vouchers to pay for transportation to and from the registration site. The goal should be to facilitate all legal votes, but I think it is a bad look to simply oppose voter IDs, because that in and of itself makes sense. The details or vagaries of getting those IDs get buried, but are manageable.
    That isn’t the goal. It is more likely to oppress voters who tend to vote Democrat than Republicans.
     
    ...I think it is a bad look to simply oppose voter IDs, because that in and of itself makes sense. The details or vagaries of getting those IDs get buried, but are manageable.
    A person should not have to present a certified birth certificate or passport to get a voter ID. Republicans don't just want voter ID's, they want people to present certified birth certificates or passports. That's really hard for a lot of voters to do and is harder for some demographics than it is for others. Making it hard for those demographics to register to vote is the real intention.
     
    A person should not have to present a certified birth certificate or passport to get a voter ID. Republicans don't just want voter ID's, they want people to present certified birth certificates or passports. That's really hard for a lot of voters to do and is harder for some demographics than it is for others. Making it hard for those demographics to register to vote is the real intention.
    I haven't read the bill, and I agree that that is ridiculous. If it requires a birth certificate or passport, then the bill should be amended to allow different type's of government issued IDs. The registration roll should only contain citizens, and that is always compared against legal IDs.
     
    That isn’t the goal. It is more likely to oppress voters who tend to vote Democrat than Republicans.
    The Republican messaging is that Democrats are against voter IDs, and it doesn't make sense to be against voter IDs, so they're winning the messaging battle. Democrats should respond that they support reasonable voter IDs. I think most people would be opposed to have to bring their birth certificates or passports to their voting location, and Democrats should explain that they support common sense IDs, and assistance to get the IDs.
     
    The Republican messaging is that Democrats are against voter IDs, and it doesn't make sense to be against voter IDs, so they're winning the messaging battle.
    Based on what metric are Republicans winning the messaging battle?

    Democrats should respond that they support reasonable voter IDs.
    Democrats have. That's not going to stop the Republicans from lying.
     
    Based on what metric are Republicans winning the messaging battle?


    Democrats have. That's not going to stop the Republicans from lying.
    My perception is that they are winning the messaging battle, and Harris seems to be slipping slightly in the polls. It isn't attributable to one thing, but it is in the mix.
     
    My perception is that they are winning the messaging battle, and Harris seems to be slipping slightly in the polls. It isn't attributable to one thing, but it is in the mix.
    That's a reasonable perception. That doesn't mean that it is the reality of the situation, just like it doesn't mean that it's not the reality of the situation.
     
    Forget being dead on arrival in the Senate. It doesn't look like it's going to make it out of the House.


    Republicans really REALLY want to lose Executive and Congress this election.

    This shutdown, if it happens, cant be unspun. It will lie at the feet of the MAGA Rs that blocked it.
     
    Republicans really REALLY want to lose Executive and Congress this election.

    This shutdown, if it happens, cant be unspun. It will lie at the feet of the MAGA Rs that blocked it.
    If the government shutdown happens it would start in October, meaning the Republicans would have October surprised themselves.
     
    If the government shutdown happens it would start in October, meaning the Republicans would have October surprised themselves.
    I would be more afraid of a shutdown impacting the ability to manage the election. What departments or groups would be shut down that impact the ability to oversee the election.
     
    I would be more afraid of a shutdown impacting the ability to manage the election. What departments or groups would be shut down that impact the ability to oversee the election.
    I think that would justify Biden declaring a national emergency which would give him access to all the money and personnel needed to protect the integrity of the election.

    The government doesn't ever actually shut down completely with no money. Areas of the government still get funded and fully function, like the military, NSA, Secret Service and FBI.

    On the flip side, a lot of federal workers would lose income and a lot of people would lose the financial assistance they desperately need.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom