Technobabel
Member
It'd be cool if the gov workers on furlough all sued Boehner for back-pay for his reckless endangerment of their livelihood.
US Federal Government Shutdown | Shutdown Shutdown, Debt Ceiling Raised
- Thread starter Jarmel
- Start date
- Status
Black Mamba
Member
Whoops
Yes, yes they do.
Dude Abides
Banned
53% of Neogaf posters don't understand statistics.
47% of all people know that.
See You Next Wednesday
Banned
So the federal Government shutdown does not effect people employed by their individual states?
Like the DMV & such?
Like the DMV & such?
MonkeyKing
Member
Looking at the list, I realized why the GOP was so eager to shut down the government. Its a wet dream wish list for them to shut down the EEOC, Dept of Labor, USDA, FDIC Inspector General, FCC, Dept of Education, on and on. The Tea Party wants to screw those bureaus and employees: they don't support that stuff anyway. Hey look! We were able to defund the IRS and the EPA!
Its reckless, irresponsible and flat out chickenshit. But now, at least I understand why they were just hell bent on making unreasonable demands. Even if they lose, they still win.
robertsan21
Member
So US is shut down, due to Obama care?
A care that should be every humans right. Republicans is pure evil and hopefully they will not ever be in charge over anything again cause it seems they only think about themselves.
A care that should be every humans right. Republicans is pure evil and hopefully they will not ever be in charge over anything again cause it seems they only think about themselves.
The Republicans would absolutely LOVE that development. Seriously, it's like you folks are willfully ignorant of the politics being played here or the extremely low level of trust and sympathy for government employees by the general public. Most people don't give two craps about furloughed workers (who are on a paid vacation, according to the main media narrative). Why do you think that both parties in Congress are getting hammered in the public relations and the Tea Party is copacetic (pro tip: they see this as helping them in their push to secure more local elections).
Yes, state governments aren't shut down, just federal (think national parks, monuments, CDC, etc).
They simply don't.
Nebraska closed a bunch of it's parks a couple of weeks ago due to a lack of funding. You can still go into them though, they're just now unmaintained, won't be picked up, and the vehicle roads that go into them are blocked off by gates. If you can make it in though, you're allowed to be in there.
I imagine the federal parks are the same way, it's just a matter of being literally impossible to enforce natural parks being closed, but they can easily prevent vehicles from driving in.
And as posted upthread, they've put up "legal obligation" barriers that people can easily get around. Basically you're on your own once you go past the barrier, but they still have to officially close it in some manner to be all buttoned up legally.
Has this been posted?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKiQp-RB0Yw
Regardless, I think it is a fine video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKiQp-RB0Yw
Regardless, I think it is a fine video.
Well, I won't be getting that image out of my head anytime soon. Thanks for that.
You don't have to thank me, I'm just doing God's work.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/02/opinion/friedman-our-democracy-is-at-stake.html?hp
This is why Obama will not negotiate
This is why Obama will not negotiate
Boom Boom Pow
Banned
actually...i believe American democracy was built to protect the minority from the majority.
or else, you can just have a bunch of racists ppl pass laws and say those laws are okay because they were passed by majorities
Yup. This is what people who say Obama and Dems should compromise doesn't understand. If the GOP succeed in these hostage taking tactics, hostage taking will be standard legislative procedure, and there will be an explosion in the number of government ending "showdowns". Imagine if Hilary wins in 2016. You'll have another 4-8 years of government shutdown/default style events.
It would make passing any law through the regular process moot as you can just take the country hostage to get it changed or repealed.
Devolution
Member
It's insulting to children to label them as such but I really don't know of a more appropriate comparison than spoiled fucking petulant children.
People who think the dems should compromise don't even fucking realize how far right they've already moved and capitulated, shit.
Black Mamba
Member
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...-pay_n_4025437.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000037
Members of furloughed-GAF should contact their GOP congressman ASAP because some of these fucks are pure evil.
possibly further away.
Like in nearly all modern democracies, there are checks and balances in place to protect minorities, this is one of the reasons you have seperation of powers. Still in the end it's a majority rules system, but it protects minorities. Like having basic human rights and that stuff in the the constitution and making changes to such a document harder then just normal votes. Democracy is also built upon compromises from all the involved parties, but that seems to be shoved aside, for them or us......
If a minority can just hold the whole process hostage, then the democracy is in danger.....
Well I am going to rant a little here. The more I hear about this the more I get pissed off. This is just such bullshit. Talk about throwing a temper tantrum and putting your stupid ideology and scoring one for you team ahead of the country. Every time I think of them smiling like fucks and being all giddy at the thought of shutting down the government my blood boils a little. Those shit stains are taking the pay checks from hundreds of thousands of families, shutting down essential programs, and they are laughing about it. It makes my blood boil.
I really hope that the attempts to paint this as a problem caused by both parties fails and the GOP is nailed to the wall for this. Or this shit will just keep happening again and again. What annoys me is how can Republicans allow these extremest to run the show for them. It boggles the mind that they just seem to be led around by them so easily.
I really hope that the attempts to paint this as a problem caused by both parties fails and the GOP is nailed to the wall for this. Or this shit will just keep happening again and again. What annoys me is how can Republicans allow these extremest to run the show for them. It boggles the mind that they just seem to be led around by them so easily.
Will they realize they are bad and say sorry? What makes people think congress cares? All time low approval rating. 87% of the country iirc. There are plenty of letters.
They just can't get through all the stacks of money on the desk.
CyclopsRock
Member
"At stake is nothing less than the principle upon which our democracy is based: majority rule."
"If you are outvoted, you accept the results and prepare for the next election."
Forgive me if I'm wrong here because American politics is far from my forte, but in the House of Representatives, the GOP are the majority and, if you "accept the results" then the Democrats were outvoted. If it is to be purely about majority voting over-all, why not just do away with the separation of the legislature(s) and executive, whilst maintaining voting? People seem to be talking as if the Republicans are in there with guns enacting a siege, but - whatever you view as the merits of Obamacare, and as a right-leaning person I actually think it's a pretty great policy for the US - should the GOP really feel obligated to do something that they don't believe is in the interests of the people that elected them (and clearly they don't) purely because the other house and executive disagree with them?
Devolution
Member
The republicans who pushed for this are a minority within the republicans themselves that happen to be running the show because the less conservative GOP members consistently find themselves on the ropes. If this goes on long enough you might see some infighting among Republicans though because plenty of GOP members are waiting for a lifeboat off that sinking ship.
CyclopsRock
Member
That may well be true but they were, nonetheless, voted in.
Brolic Gaoler
formerly Alienshogun
So you're a DoD civilian? You "should" be working for an IOU like I am right now. If you're not that's great for you.
After heavy gerrymandering.
The actual popular vote reflected a Democrat majority in the House. The way the House was redistricted meant your vote was nulled because the republicans attached your Democrat-heavy section of city to the entire rest of the state so all the rural voters votes work together to outweigh yours.
They were "voted" in because of bogus redistricting in 2010. They got over a million less votes in the 2012 congressional elections
CyclopsRock
Member
I know. I was responding to the article which suggested that democracy is at threat and we should "accept the result and prepare for the next election" - it just seems odd that the author doesn't extend this definition of democracy to the House of Representatives.
CyclopsRock
Member
So do we
Edit: Wait, you're an Aussie, right? Sorry, I always forget because you're in UK Poligaf so much! I meant the UK needs to. Cameron got a higher vote share in 2010 than Blair did in 2005, yet limped away with fucking Chris Huhne whilst Blair got a healthy majority.
They are trying to nullify a law that was was the centerpiece of TWO presidential elections AND a Supreme Court challenge while having just the House majority. And if they don't get their way, they shut down the government. Do you not see how crazy this would be if Obama capitulated?
This funding would be just for 6 weeks. After that, what will they demand next? For him to step down? They might as well if he gives in to this extortion lol. Ther GOP is the bully that won't stop until you punch them in the face...
CyclopsRock
Member
Yeah, it is crazy, and I don't think they should capitulate, albeit for purely political reasons - the thing I'm taking issue with is the author of that article's assertion that that democracy is at stake, as if the fact that the HoR was won by the Republicans is a mere technicality and doesn't really count. The fact Obama made it a part of two election campaigns doesn't really mean much when all the votes - Pres and the two legislatures - are separate. The author appears to believe that you should "accept the results" but... only when it gives you the result you want.
Edit: to be clear, I'm just criticising the article rather than passing judgement on the actual situation. I don't know enough to contribute.
The Librarian
Banned
Democrats received more votes for the House than the GOP. So, no, technically they weren't outvoted.
scytheavatar
Member
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/...ngress-government-shutdown-97693.html?hp=t1_3
There's a high chance reopening the government will be tied closely to lifting the debt ceiling, and the CR and debt ceiling issues will need to be settled at the same time. So closer to Oct. 17 is probably when the government will be reopened.
So do we
Edit: Wait, you're an Aussie, right? Sorry, I always forget because you're in UK Poligaf so much! I meant the UK needs to. Cameron got a higher vote share in 2010 than Blair did in 2005, yet limped away with fucking Chris Huhne whilst Blair got a healthy majority.
Ouch. Yeah an Aussie, our electoral system is something that we've managed, by some miracle, to do (mostly) right.
The law has been passed already if it wasn't then they would have a point. At this time, it's a tantrum.
LegendofJoe
Member
My wife had an interview scheduled in 2 weeks with the CDC for the opportunity to join the Epidemiologist Intelligence Service. With two thirds of the CDC shut down it looks like it will have to be rescheduled. I'm glad we haven't bought a plan ticket already.
The Librarian
Banned
Jarmel, I suggest linking these two articles in the OP. I think they're important to understand the dynamic that's going on here.
First up is Ezra Klein's interview with Robert Costa:
And this article from Robert Costa:
First up is Ezra Klein's interview with Robert Costa:
Ezra Klein: Walk me through the math of the House GOP a bit. Most people seem to think Boehner has around 100 members who largely back him and don't want a shutdown, and its a much smaller group, a few dozen or so, who want to take this to the brink. So why doesnt Boehner, after trying to do it the conservatives way as he has been in recent weeks, just say, we're voting on a clean CR now, as thats what the majority of the House Republican majority wants?
Robert Costa: Ever since Plan B failed on the fiscal cliff in January and you saw Boehner in near tears in front of his conference, hes been crippled. Hes been facing the consequences of that throughout the year. Everything from [the Violence Against Women Act] to the farm bill to the shutdown. The Boehner coup was unsuccessful but there were two dozen members talking about getting rid of him. Thats enough to cause problems. Boehners got the veterans and the committee chairs behind him, but the class of 2010 and 2012 doesnt have much allegiance to him.
The thing that makes Boehner interesting is hes very aware of his limited hand. Boehner doesnt live in an imaginary world where he thinks hes Tip ONeill and he can bring people into his office and corral them into a certain vote. So he treads carefully, maybe too carefully. But he knows a clean CR has never been an option for him.
EK: But why isnt it an option? A few dozen unhappy members is an annoyance, but how is it a threat? Wouldn't Boehner be better off just facing them down and then moving on with his speakership?
RC: So there are 30 to 40 true hardliners. But theres another group of maybe 50 to 60 members who are very much pressured by the hardliners. So he may have the votes on paper. But he'd create chaos. It'd be like fiscal cliff level chaos. You could make the argument that if he brought a clean CR to the floor he might have 1000-plus with him on the idea. But could they stand firm when pressured by the 30 or 40 hardliners and the outside groups?
EK: How much of this is a Boehner problem and how much of this is a House Republicans problem? Which is to say, if Boehner decided to retire tomorrow, is there another House Republican who has enough trust and allegiance in the conference that he or she could manage the institution more effectively?
RC: What we're seeing is the collapse of institutional Republican power. Its not so much about Boehner. Its things like the end of earmarks. They move away from Tom DeLay and they think they're improving the House, but now they have nothing to offer their members. The outside groups don't always move votes directly but they create an atmosphere of fear among the members. And so many of these members now live in the conservative world of talk radio and tea party conventions and Fox News invitations. And so the conservative strategy of the moment, no matter how unrealistic it might be, catches fire. The members begin to believe they can achieve things in divided government that most objective observers would believe is impossible. Leaders are dealing with these expectations that wouldn't exist in a normal environment.
Robert Costa: Ever since Plan B failed on the fiscal cliff in January and you saw Boehner in near tears in front of his conference, hes been crippled. Hes been facing the consequences of that throughout the year. Everything from [the Violence Against Women Act] to the farm bill to the shutdown. The Boehner coup was unsuccessful but there were two dozen members talking about getting rid of him. Thats enough to cause problems. Boehners got the veterans and the committee chairs behind him, but the class of 2010 and 2012 doesnt have much allegiance to him.
The thing that makes Boehner interesting is hes very aware of his limited hand. Boehner doesnt live in an imaginary world where he thinks hes Tip ONeill and he can bring people into his office and corral them into a certain vote. So he treads carefully, maybe too carefully. But he knows a clean CR has never been an option for him.
EK: But why isnt it an option? A few dozen unhappy members is an annoyance, but how is it a threat? Wouldn't Boehner be better off just facing them down and then moving on with his speakership?
RC: So there are 30 to 40 true hardliners. But theres another group of maybe 50 to 60 members who are very much pressured by the hardliners. So he may have the votes on paper. But he'd create chaos. It'd be like fiscal cliff level chaos. You could make the argument that if he brought a clean CR to the floor he might have 1000-plus with him on the idea. But could they stand firm when pressured by the 30 or 40 hardliners and the outside groups?
EK: How much of this is a Boehner problem and how much of this is a House Republicans problem? Which is to say, if Boehner decided to retire tomorrow, is there another House Republican who has enough trust and allegiance in the conference that he or she could manage the institution more effectively?
RC: What we're seeing is the collapse of institutional Republican power. Its not so much about Boehner. Its things like the end of earmarks. They move away from Tom DeLay and they think they're improving the House, but now they have nothing to offer their members. The outside groups don't always move votes directly but they create an atmosphere of fear among the members. And so many of these members now live in the conservative world of talk radio and tea party conventions and Fox News invitations. And so the conservative strategy of the moment, no matter how unrealistic it might be, catches fire. The members begin to believe they can achieve things in divided government that most objective observers would believe is impossible. Leaders are dealing with these expectations that wouldn't exist in a normal environment.
And this article from Robert Costa:
Based on my latest conversations with insiders, their plan isnt to eventually whip Republicans toward a clean CR and back down after a few days of messaging the shutdown, as some have believed; its to keep fighting, and, in the process, preserve the House GOPs fragile unity and maybe, if theyre lucky, win a concession from Senate majority leader Harry Reid.
But that unity, more than anything, is critical for Boehner, especially as the debt limit nears. Per his allies, his fear is, if he brings up a clean CR, hed be seen as conceding to Reid, whos seen as the villain of villains within the House GOP. Thirty to forty conservatives would likely revolt against such a maneuver, and so would their backers in the conservative movement. In the press, hed likely be cheered for a profile in courage; within the House, the decision would be seen by his critics on the right as a betrayal of the highest order. There is nothing they detest more than the idea of caving, and Boehner knows that.
...
Pushing back against Reid and force him to cut a deal is another leadership objective. Behind the scenes, theyre irritated by his daily killing of anything the House passes and are eager to make sure he shares some of the political pain from the shutdown. Many House Republicans believe Senate Democrats are only hanging with Reid on every vote because he has assured them the House GOP will break, and they think if they can incrementally put pressure on Reids conference, his grip could be weakened.
But that unity, more than anything, is critical for Boehner, especially as the debt limit nears. Per his allies, his fear is, if he brings up a clean CR, hed be seen as conceding to Reid, whos seen as the villain of villains within the House GOP. Thirty to forty conservatives would likely revolt against such a maneuver, and so would their backers in the conservative movement. In the press, hed likely be cheered for a profile in courage; within the House, the decision would be seen by his critics on the right as a betrayal of the highest order. There is nothing they detest more than the idea of caving, and Boehner knows that.
...
Pushing back against Reid and force him to cut a deal is another leadership objective. Behind the scenes, theyre irritated by his daily killing of anything the House passes and are eager to make sure he shares some of the political pain from the shutdown. Many House Republicans believe Senate Democrats are only hanging with Reid on every vote because he has assured them the House GOP will break, and they think if they can incrementally put pressure on Reids conference, his grip could be weakened.
I don't think the suggestion is odd at all. The obamacare bill was passed, it's current legislation. The republicans are trying to repeal it by holding the budget hostage rather than repealing it with the normal legislative process. The problem isn't them trying to change the law, it's how they go about doing it.
That's how i understand it anyway.
Shake Appeal
Member
When can we get algorithms to do all the redistricting? Because however they carve it up, it would be a damn sight better than the lunacy America labours under now.
The Librarian
Banned
You live in America now! Stop using the "u." Also, we need to meet up sometime.
Cosmic Schwung
Member
So do we
Edit: Wait, you're an Aussie, right? Sorry, I always forget because you're in UK Poligaf so much! I meant the UK needs to. Cameron got a higher vote share in 2010 than Blair did in 2005, yet limped away with fucking Chris Huhne whilst Blair got a healthy majority.
Yep, Lib Dems get it even worse and I guess any of the smaller parties just don't stand any kind of chance. How gerrymandering can exist when it's so damn obvious is beyond me.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Well attempts were made to change the electoral system and backed by Labour. Granted, AV wasn't ideal, but it was a start!
CornBurrito
Member
That is literally the dude's entire post history. Just bitter misanthropy backed up with anecdotal evidence from shopping malls, grocery stores, etc...
It honestly sounds like this backpay business is going to be their next fight right before the debt ceiling. 'Oh yeah, we'll let you raise the debt ceiling, let us just attach this bill to it that says all those people we screwed over don't get back pay.' And then we have another big fight on our hands because they want to be unreasonable.
This really shouldn't be a hard question or even a question at all; these people deserve backpay. Why can't we just make that a law after all this, in the event of a gov't shutdown, all furloughed employees get back pay.
You are literally putting people out of jobs because you failed to do your own job. That's crazy that you would hem and haw about giving them backpay.
Brolic Gaoler
formerly Alienshogun
If people who sat on their asses during this shit get paid I'd like more money for working for no pay.
I'd like to think those of us who work through this shit will get our backpay with interest.
- Status