US Federal Government Shutdown | Shutdown Shutdown, Debt Ceiling Raised

Status
Not open for further replies.
pigeon said:
Here's why I'm not sure I agree:

https://twitter.com/uscapitol/status/384889336229273600

Fifteen thousand retweets and 2600 favorites.

A lot of people are trying to draw lessons from the last shutdown, in the 90s. But this is the first shutdown we're going to have in the age of social media. I honestly believe that people are still underestimating how much of a splash this is going to be and how much people will remember it.
Click to expand...

I think one of the unintended consequences of our new digital age is helping create a digital echo chamber for the uninformed to dive right into a vicious cycle of ignorance that's impossible to emerge from.

So for those people, this shutdown is and will always be a good thing, because that's all they ever read.

It will be interesting to see what comes out of this.
 
pigeon said:
Honestly, the internal politics of the GOP Caucus are beyond my power to discern. Getting rid of Boehner through a direct vote would require an affirmative vote of 217* House members, and so would appointing a new Speaker, so in terms of REGULAR ORDER, it's basically impossible to get rid of Boehner. But if the caucus has its own rules regarding acceptable Speaker behavior and can somehow get Boehner to "voluntarily" resign, obviously he'd be gone.

At that point we'd be back in Speaker vote territory. Since you need 217 votes for a Speaker, Pelosi can't ever win that vote unless some Republicans actually cross the aisle and vote for her. So it would be up to the GOP to find a candidate that could command 217 Republican votes. Given their previous success whipping for things like "don't shut down the government", it might take them a little while.



Two issues here -- the first is that, because of all the drama, Boehner adopted a super-Hastert Rule in his Speakership -- he only brings up bills that can command 218 Republican votes. The problem is that he used to have about 250 votes to play with -- now he has more like 230. That's a very tight margin of error.

The second issue is that there are actually three positions in the GOP caucus:

a) Will always vote no, wants to watch the world burn
b) Will vote yes on CR, rational actor
c) Will support passage of a clean CR as long as they can vote against it

Group C is the one that makes this especially complicated, because in order to fulfill their wishes, Boehner has to bring up the bill against their expressed desires. As you can imagine, accomplishing that isn't straightforward.

* one is dead right now
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply. That all makes a lot more sense and I'm starting to understand why there's so much uncertainty with regards to what the House will end up doing.

Still, I can't be sure if Boehner is incompetent or if he's just been driven further to the right, whether by conscience or necessity.
 
KingGondo said:
My impression is that most people think that Congress raising the debt ceiling is analogous to Amex approving a maximum balance increase on your credit card.

"How irresponsible! I can't just spend all the money I want and get away with it, why should the government?"
Click to expand...

People have just been too conditioned to have negative reactions to the word "debt" when it comes to national politics. Images of china and the red scare start popping into their heads.
 
Historical site closures disappoint Philadelphia tourists

Some quotes:

Harrison and Shanna Blizzard's honeymoon got off to a disappointing start.

The Prince Edward Island couple's plans to visit the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall were thwarted by the federal government shutdown that began at midnight over the bruising battle of funding of the Affordable Care Act known as Obamacare.

"It is kind of frustrating," Harrison Blizzard said. The honeymoon is the couple's first trip to Philadelphia, and they wanted to see the places "where America became America," he said this morning at Independence Mall.

"I wanted to learn the history," Blizzard said.
Click to expand...

In the Philadelphia region, the shutdown impacts sites such as the bell, Independence Hall and Valley Forge National Historical Park. The shutdown, which went into effect at 12:01 a.m. today after President Obama and leaders in Congress failed to agree on a spending plan, is the first in nearly two decades.

Road were closed this morning at Valley Forge. A sign was posted at the front gate informing the parked was locked as a result of the shutdown. Bike trails were also closed.
Click to expand...

Depending on its length, the closures could hit tourism in the region hard. Last year, more than 3.5 million people visited Independence National Historical Park, according to park service data. More than 300,000 of those visitors came in October.

Valley Forge saw more than 1.4 million visitors last year, including more than 107,000 in October.
Click to expand...

Additional effects of the shutdown in the Philadelphia area include the furloughing of tens of thousands of federal workers, including civilian military employees and delays in getting loans for first-time home buyers and low-to-moderate income borrowers.
Click to expand...

Most in the article blame it squarely on Republicans. My wife works at a small, but private museum in the Historic District, so luckily hers is open. The problem? Who's going to come to tourist areas when the biggest attractions are closed?

In addition, tens of thousands of federal workers in the area furloughed? In a city that's already struggling with unemployment, that could put families relying on that income in a real bind.

This is once again another action by Republicans in congress that disproportionately effects the lower classes.
 
KingGondo said:
My impression is that most people think that Congress raising the debt ceiling is analogous to Amex approving a maximum balance increase on your credit card.

"How irresponsible! I can't just spend all the money I want and get away with it, why should the government?"
Click to expand...

This is embarrassing, but I'd rather be informed and embarrassed than uninformed. Could you explain the debt ceiling to me? Because I was one of those people that thought it was similar to a credit card limit.
 
KingGondo said:
My impression is that most people think that Congress raising the debt ceiling is analogous to Amex approving a maximum balance increase on your credit card.

"How irresponsible! I can't just spend all the money I want and get away with it, why should the government?"
Click to expand...

And Republicans prey on these people. It's in their best interest to perpetuate this ignorance.
 
Punchy4486 said:
This is embarrassing, but I'd rather be informed and embarrassed than uninformed. Could you explain the debt ceiling to me? Because I was one of those people that thought it was similar to a credit card limit.
Click to expand...
Bonercop provided a video and you can go look at Empty Vessel's post history for a thorough explanation of the debt ceiling as well.
 
pigeon said:
Here's why I'm not sure I agree:

https://twitter.com/uscapitol/status/384889336229273600

Fifteen thousand retweets and 2600 favorites.

A lot of people are trying to draw lessons from the last shutdown, in the 90s. But this is the first shutdown we're going to have in the age of social media. I honestly believe that people are still underestimating how much of a splash this is going to be and how much people will remember it.
Click to expand...

Eh, most of the tweets responding are either mocking it or going LOL YOU HAZ ONLY 30K FOLLOWERS LOLOLOLOLOL. I doubt it will do much, most people seem to be going full stupid in regards to the twitter than anything constructive.
 
PBalfredo said:
So what was the genesis for the Republican Party's decision to double down against ACA? Is it really because, once implemented, it could be a big win for democrats? Why bet so much trying to kill ACA dead rather than wearing the bi-partisan hat and taking half the credit?
Click to expand...

I think it's that once implemented, it could be a big win for the Democrats, but that's not quite how they'd describe it. Policy-wise, they're worried that entitlements tend to grow in scope as time goes on, and that once implemented, the constituencies that benefit from them make revoking them all but impossible. They're concerned that the handouts will be popular, even as they weaken the long-term fiscal position of the country.

Of course, dems see this as simply being worried that their program will become popular once implemented.

My own take on the matter is that the other bits of Obamacare have been pretty effective in bending the cost curve downward and tamping down the explosion of health care spending, and therefore even with a new subsidy our fiscal position is a lot stronger post-Obamacare than pre-Obamacare.
 
Fenderputty said:
People have just been too conditioned to have negative reactions to the word "debt" when it comes to national politics. Images of china and the red scare start popping into their heads.
Click to expand...
Anti-debt rhetoric often rises to the level of religious fervor. I don't think it's a coincidence that the same people who are debt absolutists on a personal scale (adherents to Dave Ramsey) are the same way when it comes to government debt.

The scary (and sad) part is that the GOP has learned to exploit voters' personal fear of default, debt collectors, and being underwater on your mortgage into a more generalized fear and distrust of any government debt, and perversely, into a system of austerity that hampers an already lackluster economy.

Punchy4486 said:
This is embarrassing, but I'd rather be informed and embarrassed than uninformed. Could you explain the debt ceiling to me? Because I was one of those people that thought it was similar to a credit card limit.
Click to expand...

Wikipedia said:
The United States debt ceiling or debt limit is a legislative restriction on the amount of national debt that can be issued by the Treasury. Because expenditures are authorized by separate legislation, the debt ceiling does not actually restrict deficits. In effect, it can only restrain the Treasury from paying for expenditures that have already been incurred.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_debt_ceiling

Don't be afraid to ask questions. PoliGAF is cool as long as you're not a deliberate troll.
 
I assume it's already been posted, but I do think this is the underappreciated story here--that an absolute best-case scenario for the resolution to this mess is still a HUGE victory for small-government conservatives, as we'll end up with the red line budget in this image:

compromise.png


(from WaPo)

Sequestration sucks.
 
Households can't print money or change interest rates either.
 
Punchy4486 said:
This is embarrassing, but I'd rather be informed and embarrassed than uninformed. Could you explain the debt ceiling to me? Because I was one of those people that thought it was similar to a credit card limit.
Click to expand...

I posted a really good explanation of the debt ceiling in PoliGAF the other day, but just for everybody's benefit, here's my last actual reasonable explanation of the debt ceiling ever.

I. Liberty Bonds
Before 1917, there was no law that provided generic borrowing authority to the United State government. If borrowing was considered necessary, Congress passed authorization to borrow a specific amount for a specific purpose or with a specific end date to the authorization.

During World War I, Congress passed the Second Liberty Bond Act, to authorize borrowing for war purposes. To allow flexibility, this bill did not contain any time limit of the authorization for borrowing, nor any specific restriction on what the borrowed money could be used for; however, it contained a limit on the maximum amount that could be borrowed.

When the borrowing authority granted by the Second Liberty Bond Act ran out, rather than pass a new law, Congress just passed a law that increased the authority granted by the act. And then they did it again, and again, and again...

The debt ceiling that we're worrying about today, in other words, is the limit on borrowing authority imposed by the Second Liberty Bond Act in 1917, plus about a thousand amendments to increase that limit. There's no particular reason or justification for it other than that.

II. The Budget
The United States Constitution, for reasons relating to King George III, limits taxation and appropriation authority to Congress. Only the legislative branch can create new taxes, or approve spending on behalf of the government. (Technically they are the only branch that can approve borrowing on behalf of the government, but as noted in point I above, they pretty much signed that away in 1917; they now approve borrowing in large chunks rather than approving individual loans.) However, the executive branch is responsible for the enforcement and execution of the laws.

Typically, the manner in which this works is that Congress appropriates a certain amount of money for a specific purpose, and the executive branch is responsible for actually spending that money to accomplish that purpose. It is important to note that, if Congress doesn't appropriate enough money, the executive branch doesn't have the power to appropriate more; contrariwise, if Congress appropriates money the executive branch doesn't want to spend (because they oppose the program, maybe), the executive doesn't have the option of not spending it. (This was settled in a Nixonian budget fight way back when.) The executive branch must spend the money Congress has instructed it to spend, no more, no less. This, for the record, is why the government shuts down if Congress doesn't pass a budget; there's no more money, and the executive can't do anything about it.

You may have already detected the problem here. Congress has the power to tell the executive branch to spend a certain amount of money. But Congress is also responsible for GETTING that money so that he government can spend it. What happens if Congress tells the executive to spend money it didn't bother to provide?

What happens is a debt ceiling crisis. The executive branch is forbidden from NOT spending money. It's also forbidden from getting any MORE money. As a result, America is forced into spending money it doesn't have. Just like anybody else, when you spend money you don't have, you bounce checks, and when you miss loan payments because paying them requires spending money you don't have, you go into default. Going into default is just as bad as missing mortgage payments and car payments would be for you, except at a national level. It would almost certainly create a global economic crisis, since most of the world views America as guaranteed to pay its debts.

Since Congress has already committed to spending a certain amount of money, it's on them to make sure that money is available by raising the debt ceiling and extending the borrowing authority of the United States government. Not doing so is an act of malfeasance that would provoke catastrophic results for the world and for each American citizen.
 
bonercop said:
1.governments print money
2.raising the debt limit has nothing to do with spending, it's about paying off spending already incurred
Click to expand...

point #2 is a bit circular, and this is essentially why I feel that the credit limit thing is an appropriate (tough not perfect!) analogy.

If we're ever going to get a handle on government spending, do you think it's EVER going to come from the government willingly gutting itself? Or do you think there will have to be some financial pressure?

Well, lots of reasons, but ultimately, not raising the credit limit on your credit card will not cause harm to the world economy.

It would be pretty much like if the credit card company bought stuff using your credit card (which is really the company credit card), like they do every year, and then told you that you hit the maximum and they weren't lifting it this time. If you were the Treasury Department. And then the US credit rating dropped and caused shaky Euro markets to collapse among other things. See how horrible this analogy is yet?

I mean, you're not that important.
Click to expand...

whelp. you kinda took the entire analogy out of the analogy here. Besides, I don't think anyone is saying the gov't is the credit card company here. They would be the sad credit card user that spent more than he/she could afford.
 
Part of me is afraid that the Ds are going to act like a OCD cleaning lady confronted with a dryer full of clothes.
 
FlashFlooder said:
point #2 is a bit circular, and this is essentially why I feel that the credit limit thing is an appropriate (tough not perfect!) analogy.

If we're ever going to get a handle on government spending, do you think it's EVER going to come from the government willingly gutting itself? Or do you think there will have to be some financial pressure?



whelp. you kinda took the entire analogy out of the analogy here.
Click to expand...

Having the government gut itself is exactly the same as gutting the economy. Why should we do that?
 
FlashFlooder said:
point #2 is a bit circular, and this is essentially why I feel that the credit limit thing is an appropriate (tough not perfect!) analogy.

If we're ever going to get a handle on government spending, do you think it's EVER going to come from the government willingly gutting itself? Or do you think there will have to be some financial pressure?
Click to expand...

It should be achieved through the fundamental constitutional process that 99.9% of all other legislation and agreements have come from. If the Republican Party can not garner the necessary representative numbers in the relative branches of power to achieve it then it reflects that perhaps a majority of Americans are not fully on board with such legislative actions.

America has already agreed to spend that money, what republicans are doing is saying after the fact that we no longer want to pay the bill we initially agreed upon. It's saying we've purchased these goods, used some of these goods, told you we'd pay for these goods, but now have decided we don't actually want to give you the money you are owed for these goods.

The republicans may have a sliver of justification during a brand new congress when they have made no prior decisions about spending but as it stands this very congress agreed to upping the limit and is going to be reneging on that agreement by way of extortion.
 
I'm thoroughly amused that FoxNews is denying the government shutting down, but instead suggests that the government is undergoing a "slimdown."

Beaten by Bitmap Frogs!
 
Soka said:
I'm thoroughly amused that FoxNews is denying the government shutting down, but instead suggests that the government is undergoing a "slimdown."

Beaten by Bitmap Frogs!
Click to expand...

Hard-fought victory for the Republicans, then. As it should be!

Having the government gut itself is exactly the same as gutting the economy.
Click to expand...

Not sure I'm following you, but if I am I disagree.
 
Been really interesting to watch Fox today. They've pivoted from blaming Obama to "a shutdown's not so bad". In fact, they're calling it a governement "slimdown" now lol
 
Brolic Gaoler said:
Where do you work? If you're "still working" and your job is actually fed instead of state/local you get to work, but you won't get paid till this shit corrects itself.
Click to expand...

Work at an Army Depot. The colonel actually got on the announcer and said we wouldn't be impacted in any fashion, so I have to assume it's true, 'cause there would be an uproar if they just sprung it on us after that. As far as everyone's been told, we'll still be getting our checks.

Of course if it goes on for weeks it may be a different story, but it's not going to go on for weeks.
 
Noticeably lots of grumpy tourists at Battery Park wanting to see Statue of Liberty.
Felt sad for people that flew across the world and have to get screwed over like this.
 
massoluk said:
Noticeably lots of grumpy tourists at Battery Park wanting to see Statue of Liberty.
Felt sad for people that flew across the world and have to get screwed over like this.
Click to expand...

They'll get to tell their grand kids about the time they went to the US and watched us make fools of ourselves instead.
 
So the GOP has its tits tied in a knot all cause of Obamacare. The healthcare plan that is based on Republican Mitt Romney's healthcare plan that he rolled out as governor in Massachusetts. The hypocrisy is astounding.
 
ZombiePlatypus said:
So the GOP has its tits tied in a knot all cause of Obamacare. The healthcare plan that is based on Republican Mitt Romney's healthcare plan that he rolled out as governor in Massachusetts. The hypocrisy is astounding.
Click to expand...


The worst part about this whole thing is that the assholes causing this problem have gerrymandered themselves into a position of safety. Essentially rigging the system so they don't have to answer for their actions with their jobs.
 
ZombiePlatypus said:
So the GOP has its tits tied in a knot all cause of Obamacare. The healthcare plan that is based on Republican Mitt Romney's healthcare plan that he rolled out as governor in Massachusetts. The hypocrisy is astounding.
Click to expand...
It's ok if a state does it! But it's not ok if the federal government does it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Realizing the truth of my debt
2 3
104
6K
jufonuk replied
[UK] Apple pulls data protection tool after UK government security row
2
76
5K
Paasei replied
Are the people ready to be governed by AI
Science 
31
510
ReasonBeing replied
US air traffic control still runs on Windows 95 and floppy disks
2
60
402
YCoCg replied
Temu to stop selling goods from China directly to US customers
33
800
OmegaSupreme replied
Top Bottom