Blame The Democrats

[Gaugingcatenate]

Obama is responsible for the ACA, which he signed into law, was judged constitutional by the SC and which he fought and won a presidential election on the back of. The shutdown seems to be at least 80% the GOP's doing.

You see, we have co-equal branches of government here... the House Republicans were all elected as well. In addition we have a federalist system, which means power is shared by national and state governments, of which the Republicans have 37 of the Governorships... so its not tipped so in favor of the Democrats as it appears on the surface, to some.

You see, the president is doing things way beyond his purview, adjusting legislation to his purposes... giving exemptions, delaying implementing parts of the law. Not fair and probably not legal either...

How do you figure to blame it 80% on the Republicans? They have offered to negotiate, sent over funding bills, it is Harry and Barry who have, in absolutist terms, refused to compromise.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Sounds like Albert Hall syndrome.

Sorry, not familiar with that illness... have heard of the concert hall under that name, but...

 

[humbolt]

Sorry, not familiar with that illness... have heard of the concert hall under that name, but...

I was referring to the Beatles line about knowing how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall. A little too remote a reference, maybe.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Satire and lampooning can be very thought provoking and sum up in a few words or a political cartoon in a single picture what others cant say with volumes of words.

I watch it every night. The point of the show is to be funny, not informative. Stewart regularly reminds his audience. It is a faux-news show. His show is effective because it makes light of the way that the news is covered, not the news itself.

Yes, satire can be effective. The problem that the Daily Show departed from satire, and dropped into simple name-calling. And I can get that on CSPAN. Jon runs the tired line about how it is a law as though laws somehow can't be changed. Obama's Administration has made something like 1400 changes to it. I cite the example of Social Security which has been changed to the point that it is the opposite of its origins.

This is politics. This is how our country is run. If you don't like it, vote for new people. The Democrats do this stuff for my entire life and now want to play a virgin the morning after the fraternity party. Spare me.

Both sides have some blame. Jon's inability to grasp that says he has let his ideology influence his show which isn't news. He has become a parody of what he is trying to mock.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Actually it was Nancy Pelosi who said that. Obama doesn't have to do anything except wait for the Republicans to either come to their senses and vote on a clean CR...or they can self destruct. Meanwhile he does have other options if push comes to shove. It won't be pretty but it will be effective and it will blow your mind.

Actually it has been more than 1. Here Obama sets the tone : ""You don't get to extract a ransom for doing your job, for doing what you're supposed to be doing anyway ... just because there's a law there that you don't like". I happen to have negotiated difficult contracts. The last thing you want to do is corner the other side into a situtation where your opponent loses face with his boss. Obama isn't waiting. He is deliberately setting fire to the negotiation process. In terms of the CRs, he may have options, but it is much less so with the debt ceiling. Most people do not want the government shutdown. Most people do not want the debt ceiling raised. He has options when the majority is with him, that he lacks when it opposes his ideas. He lacks the leadership to create a majority the way Reagan did.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

If this was the case, why haven't Republicans offered a budget bill that didn't also include their political agenda?

Because..... They are politicians. Why is this such a surprise.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Obama is responsible for the ACA, which he signed into law, was judged constitutional by the SC and which he fought and won a presidential election on the back of. The shutdown seems to be at least 80% the GOP's doing.

This is such a tired talking point. Think please.

Whether it is a law is not relevant. It is bait in a game called politics.

It was not judged to be constitutional. It was re-written by the Supreme Court to be constitutional.

This is basic math. 100% divided by 2 is 50%. The process broke down when the Democrats refused to negotiate. Whatever blame the GOP gets - and it deserves some - isn't more than half.

 

[Deuce]

Per the Constitution, the House originates spending bills related to incoming taxes. The SCOTUS found the individual mandate to be a 'tax'. Thus it is purview of the House to determine if and how that is spent.

Such bills originating in the House does not mean the House has unilateral control over it. They still have to pass the Senate and get the President to sign, they know this, you know this, everybody knows this. Checks and balances, remember?

Well, it was never a reasonable expectation that President Obama would derail Obamacare. The GOP knows this, you know this, everybody knows this.

 

[Deuce]

Actually it has been more than 1. Here Obama sets the tone : ""You don't get to extract a ransom for doing your job, for doing what you're supposed to be doing anyway ... just because there's a law there that you don't like". I happen to have negotiated difficult contracts. The last thing you want to do is corner the other side into a situtation where your opponent loses face with his boss. Obama isn't waiting. He is deliberately setting fire to the negotiation process. In terms of the CRs, he may have options, but it is much less so with the debt ceiling. Most people do not want the government shutdown. Most people do not want the debt ceiling raised. He has options when the majority is with him, that he lacks when it opposes his ideas. He lacks the leadership to create a majority the way Reagan did.

Reagan had an opposition party that was mostly made of reasonable people.

This is not currently the case.

 

[Linc]

P. Ryan and his budget were defeated in the 2012 election 332--206.
The mini-CR bills have been taken over from Appropriations and the reasonable Rogers.
The House is controlled by E. Can'tor and P. Ryan.
My talking points.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

This is such a tired talking point. Think please.

Whether it is a law is not relevant. It is bait in a game called politics.

It was not judged to be constitutional. It was re-written by the Supreme Court to be constitutional.

This is basic math. 100% divided by 2 is 50%. The process broke down when the Democrats refused to negotiate. Whatever blame the GOP gets - and it deserves some - isn't more than half.

Well since the Supreme Court has the final say what is considered constitutional, who has the authority to reverse their judgement?

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Reagan had an opposition party that was mostly made of reasonable people.

This is not currently the case.

Spare me the whole 'this time it is different.' That is silly, and occurs only to someone who lives in the current crisis. I was alive at the time, and these people hated each other. They put those feelings aside, and made compromises.

The only thing that makes today different is the flexibility in borrowing against the future. Reagan and his contemporaries had the ability to give then-voters everything at the expense of their children. Now we are unable to do that. This is why the debt ceiling shutdown will be more painful because it isn't about whether the government is open or not, but how much money we are willing to put into keeping it open. Everyone wants the government to open, but no one wants to pay for it.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Well since the Supreme Court has the final say what is considered constitutional, who has the authority to reverse their judgement?

It is a law, and currently constitutional. I find the peity about the ACA a little much,particularly the part about the SC finding it constitutional. The exchanges are open, and I don't think that this is about the ACA. I think that the GOP wants pork for its audience, and Obama wants to put politics above opening the government. He thinks that the GOP will fold. Maybe they will, but this is a clear case of politics first, welfare of the nation second. Well somewhere less than first - with DC I have never really figured out how far down the list welfare of the nation comes.

 

[Perotista]

The president has a shutdown strategy that is nothing more than a scortched earth policy until the GOP is forced to surrender. He is putting his politics above the welfare of the nation, and yet he has the temerity to blame the Republicans for the consequences.

His strategy is really a political bet. He is betting that the Republicans will have to fold under the pressure that he creates. He is betting that the GOP has picked the wrong issue, and that he will win by holding his breath. Understand the terms of the president's bet: Americans lose until he wins.

The issue isn't the ACA as much as the President's belief that he can have it all. He grew fat and lazy during the 2009 and 2010 time frame when Americans handed the Democrats complete control of the government. They did what they wanted, on their time table. Today he has to negotiate, and doesn't like going to work.

The GOP is doing what politicians are supposed to do. They are essentially offering to trade something that their audience generally doesn't like, increasing the debt limit, for something that its audience wants, defunding Obamacare ("ACA"). In the world of politics, the Democrats should respond with an alternative, one which protects the ACA while providing more party favors for the Republicans such as approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, offshore drilling, or reductions in pollution regulations. The breakdown in this process comes from the Democrats who have refused to participate in a political process.

(You can blame the GOP as well, but they aren't the ones who said we will not negotiate)

Longer Version :

Who Caused the Government Shutdown? Obama and the Democrats are at Fault

I personally think placing or tying the defunding of the ACA to the budget or CR was and is stupid. This fight over the ACA should have been an election issue in 2014 in the battle for the U.S. Senate. For me, this fight is of Republican makings, although you are correct in asserting it is the Democrats who has said they will not negotiate.

Since this shutdown was of GOP origin, why do you expect the Democrats to save them from themselves? I also think the Republicans have no plan B or any other plan on what to do if the Democrats do not back down. In the past I have come down on the republican side on most economic issues, this isn't one of them. I view this shut down as pure bad politics.

 

[Fenton]

You claim to manage credit risk on your blog profile. I hope to god you
are lying, because otherwise there is some poor bank out relying on your "analysis". If you were competent in your stated field, you would be aware that even the threat of defaulting on debt would tangibly hurt our nations ability to borrow money. Actually following through with it would be a complete disaster.

No sane politician ever "compromises" by saying "give my me stuff or I will destroy the nations credit rating".

Wait, did you actually FALL FOR the Democrats "default" scare tactic, or are you just parroting theit drivel, knowing full well we can continue to service our debt with the Govt shutdown ?

And besides, the Govt shutdown has zero effect on our biggest creditor, our Central Bank.

 

[Fenton]

It is a law, and currently constitutional. I find the peity about
the ACA a little much,particularly the part about the SC finding it constitutional. The exchanges are open, and I don't think that this is about the ACA. I think that the GOP wants pork for its audience, and Obama wants to put politics above opening the government. He thinks that the GOP will fold. Maybe they will, but this is a clear case of politics first, welfare of the nation second. Well somewhere less than first - with DC I have never really figured out how far down the list welfare of the nation comes.

You can't argue the merits of Constituionallity when the President himself steers clear of his Constitutional obligations by manipulating the law to his benefit.

The GOP is doing what their voters sent them in there to do.

Yo kill a highly destructive law, that had zero GOP support.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

I personally think placing or tying the defunding of the ACA to the budget or CR was and is stupid. This fight over the ACA should have been an election issue in 2014 in the battle for the U.S. Senate. For me, this fight is of Republican makings, although you are correct in asserting it is the Democrats who has said they will not negotiate.

Since this shutdown was of GOP origin, why do you expect the Democrats to save them from themselves? I also think the Republicans have no plan B or any other plan on what to do if the Democrats do not back down. In the past I have come down on the republican side on most economic issues, this isn't one of them. I view this shut down as pure bad politics.

The CRs aren't terribly important. They keep the government running for two weeks. The real battle is the debt ceiling. So if the GOP funds the government for two weeks, do you expect them to roll on the debt ceiling as well. You may be an interesting data point, because a lot of people do not want to close down the government. The CRs are bad politics for the GOP. The problem is that raising the debt ceiling is an unpopular idea.

I don't know where the GOP has to draw the line,but they have to deliver results to the people who voted for them. If they rubber stamp the ideas of the Democrats they will be in short supply in 2015.

In terms of not having a plan B... The Democrats plan A is to say that we don't have a problem. For all of the motion and talk, they don't really have a plan either.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

You claim to manage credit risk on your blog profile. I hope to god you are lying, because otherwise there is some poor bank out relying on your "analysis". If you were competent in your stated field, you would be aware that even the threat of defaulting on debt would tangibly hurt our nations ability to borrow money. Actually following through with it would be a complete disaster.

No sane politician ever "compromises" by saying "give my me stuff or I will destroy the nations credit rating".

I left banking in 2007 in part because of my concerns the impact of the housing crisis would have on our customers. Interestingly enough there were a lot of people like you in management above me who thought that we could fix debt with more debt. Of course, they aren't in banking anymore either. They left under different terms. So I have to ask whether you ever worked in banking.

If you were even modestly informed on our nation's debt picture, you would be telling the GOP to ask for more.

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

You can't argue the merits of Constituionallity when the President himself steers clear of his Constitutional obligations by manipulating the law to his benefit.

The GOP is doing what their voters sent them in there to do.

Yo kill a highly destructive law, that had zero GOP support.

I hope that isn't right. There is no way that the Democrats will concede it. I can see holding it up in exchange for pork, but if it is a battle for the ACA, we might as well draw-up secession papers. The government will not be able to function if that is the dividing line.

 

[Perotista]

The CRs aren't terribly important. They keep the government running for two weeks. The real battle is the debt ceiling. So if the GOP funds the government for two weeks, do you expect them to roll on the debt ceiling as well. You may be an interesting data point, because a lot of people do not want to close down the government. The CRs are bad politics for the GOP. The problem is that raising the debt ceiling is an unpopular idea.

I don't know where the GOP has to draw the line,but they have to deliver results to the people who voted for them. If they rubber stamp the ideas of the Democrats they will be in short supply in 2015.

In terms of not having a plan B... The Democrats plan A is to say that we don't have a problem. For all of the motion and talk, they don't really have a plan either.

I think shutting down government over defunding the ACA was a bad idea. Shutting down government in order to curb spending I could understand that and most of the previous government shutdowns has been over spending.

On the debt ceiling, are Republicans recent converts to opposing it. During the Bush II years the Congressional Republicans were all gung ho to increase the debt ceiling. In the Senate in 2003 50 GOP senators voted to raise it, only 1 voted against raising it. It was the Democratic senators who voiced irate vocal opposition. In 2004 among Republican Senators, the vote was the same, 50 for raising it, 1 against and in 2006 it was 52 Republican Senators voting to raise and only 3 voting against it. During this time the House followed roughly the same, most republicans voting for raising the debt ceiling and most Democrats voting against.

Funny thing happened when Obama became president, all of a sudden congressional Republicans did a 180 degree turn and opposed raising the debt ceiling. The Democrats did the same 180, but they went from opposing the debt ceiling increasing to being all for it and using the same arguments the Republicans used for raising it during the Bush II years.

You can bet your bottom dollar if a Republican wins the presidency in 2016, these roles will once more be reversed. The Democrats will be totally against raising the debt ceiling and the Republicans all for it. You see, each parties core value on the debt ceiling is determined by which party holds the White House.

 

[Moot]

The democrats have a history of saying 'once you pass x we will talk about y'... but y never comes. Be it talking about cuts promised for a vote on raising the debt ceiling or taxes, or border security after a vote on amnesty, or ... it goes on and on.

Well, republicans have a long history of saying that up is down and down is up. It's like whatever they say the exact opposite is true. It never fails.

 

[Andalublue]

Well, republicans have a long history of saying that up is down and down is up. It's like whatever they say the exact opposite is true. It never fails.

Well, along with a lack of power comes great irresponsibility.

 

[Moot]

Well, along with a lack of power comes great irresponsibility.

"Words of wisdom, lloyd."

 

[JoeTheEconomist]

Funny thing happened when Obama became president, all of a sudden congressional Republicans did a 180 degree turn and opposed raising the debt ceiling. The Democrats did the same 180, but they went from opposing the debt ceiling increasing to being all for it and using the same arguments the Republicans used for raising it during the Bush II years.

I agree, and I put Obamas quote from 2006 into the article. "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure ... I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.” ~ Senator Obama

You can bet your bottom dollar if a Republican wins the presidency in 2016, these roles will once more be reversed. The Democrats will be totally against raising the debt ceiling and the Republicans all for it. You see, each parties core value on the debt ceiling is determined by which party holds the White House.

Raising the debt ceiling is unpopular nationally. The survey I saw said 61% of the public oppose it. It is hard to get elected to the Presidency with a campaign slogan of a majority of you are wrong.

I think we are getting to the upper range on where we can lift it. Today interest rates are near zero. As they normalize, interest costs will explode. Interest is different from all other expenditure in that it is not subject to voter approval. If you don't like the ACA, vote in a new batch of Congressmen and it is gone. With interest you can change all 535 people in Congress, and they aren't able to do anything about it. Today interest is $420 billion or so. That is on revenue of $1.7 trillion.

People are largely pissed today because Washington takes so much and delivers so little. Imagine what will happen when we actually have to pay cash.

 

[FederalRepublic]

Here's the rub....both sides agree the debt ceiling needs to be raised. So what is there to negotiate?

Everything in the budget that makes necessary to raise the debt ceiling, otherwise there's no point in having a debt ceiling.