• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP senator objects to budget conference committee

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,738
Reaction score
6,290
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
oh boy.

GOP senator objects to budget conference committee - The Hill's Floor Action

Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) objected Wednesday to a Democratic proposal to fund the government and form a budget conference committee.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) offered Republicans an opportunity to go to conference on a budget after the House passes the Senate continuing resolution (CR) to fund the government through Nov. 15.

“Speaker [John] Boehner can end this legislative shutdown today,” Reid said. “We’re saying we’ll go to conference on anything you want to go to conference on.”

The government has been shut down since midnight Tuesday because lawmakers can’t agree on a CR to fund the government. House Republicans have tried to attach riders to defund and delay ObamaCare, but Senate Democrats have said they would only accept a “clean” CR.

This was the 19th time Senate Democrats have asked to form a budget conference committee.

“I am so disappointed that the Republicans are saying 'hold the country hostage' and that’s the place we’re left in,” said Murray, who serves as chairwoman of the Senate Budget Committee.

Toomey pointed out that Democrats rejected an offer from the House to form a conference committee on the CR. Democrats objected, saying because the government was already shut down, a conference on the CR would be like “negotiating with a gun to our head.”

“Let’s go to conference immediately as the House has requested so we can open the government,” Toomey said. “Let’s try to break the impasse by going to conference.”

okay i thought republicans wanted to have a conference committee. well the senate just offered to give the house their conference committee, but only without the government shutdown hanging over them like a gallows.
 
oh boy.

GOP senator objects to budget conference committee - The Hill's Floor Action



okay i thought republicans wanted to have a conference committee. well the senate just offered to give the house their conference committee, but only without the government shutdown hanging over them like a gallows.

Perhaps I'm missing something here. To what end would it be wise for House Republicans to agree to lift the government shutdown and go to conference with Senate Democrats to fund the budget? Didn't the Democrats have this opportunity weeks ago, prior to the shutdown taking place, when Republicans passed any number of other budget resolutions that Harry Reid and the Senate refused to vote on?

Sounds like a political game designed to suck in the gullible - It's apparently working with some, based on the appearance of this OP.
 
Perhaps I'm missing something here. To what end would it be wise for House Republicans to agree to lift the government shutdown and go to conference with Senate Democrats to fund the budget? Didn't the Democrats have this opportunity weeks ago, prior to the shutdown taking place, when Republicans passed any number of other budget resolutions that Harry Reid and the Senate refused to vote on?

Sounds like a political game designed to suck in the gullible - It's apparently working with some, based on the appearance of this OP.

It's a typical Dem tactic. "Give us what we want for six weeks so we can hammer you in the press"...

Good afternoon jcj...
 
Perhaps I'm missing something here. To what end would it be wise for House Republicans to agree to lift the government shutdown and go to conference with Senate Democrats to fund the budget? Didn't the Democrats have this opportunity weeks ago, prior to the shutdown taking place, when Republicans passed any number of other budget resolutions that Harry Reid and the Senate refused to vote on?

Sounds like a political game designed to suck in the gullible - It's apparently working with some, based on the appearance of this OP.

the senate had passed a budget back in march, and this the 19th time senate democrats offer of a conference committee have been rejected. ending the government shutdown is what counts at the moment.

besides the conference committee toomey wants is the one that would only fund the government for six to ten weeks, and then this same government shutdown sideshow will happen all over again i bet.

we should not be governing from crisis to crisis. just fund the government with a clean c.r, then resolve the budget problems in conference committee.
 
Last edited:
the senate had passed a budget back in march, and this the 19th time senate democrats offer of a conference committee have been rejected. besides ending the government shutdown is what counts at the moment.

The Senate has not passed a budget resolution, much less any appropriation bills sent by the House. If you have evidence to the contrary, please provide a link...
 
the senate had passed a budget back in march, and this the 19th time senate democrats offer of a conference committee have been rejected. besides ending the government shutdown is what counts at the moment.

You've stated the obvious, but not given a rationale for why Republicans would now be wise to lift the shutdown in order to conference with Senate Democrats. Perhaps you believe in the Obama method of negotiation, where you threaten and threaten and then back down when the rubber hits the road. It's been a disasterous strategy for Obama so why should Republicans take it up?

Republicans have two options now - either stand by the principles they were voted in to represent or cave in and simply vote in favor of what the White House and Democrats want. I hope they retain a backbone and stick to principles. If they do, over time, the blame will flip over to Obama and people will question why everyone else can get a delay in Obamacare implementation but the average citizen can't.
 
You've stated the obvious, but not given a rationale for why Republicans would now be wise to lift the shutdown in order to conference with Senate Democrats. Perhaps you believe in the Obama method of negotiation, where you threaten and threaten and then back down when the rubber hits the road. It's been a disasterous strategy for Obama so why should Republicans take it up?

Republicans have two options now - either stand by the principles they were voted in to represent or cave in and simply vote in favor of what the White House and Democrats want. I hope they retain a backbone and stick to principles. If they do, over time, the blame will flip over to Obama and people will question why everyone else can get a delay in Obamacare implementation but the average citizen can't.

maybe because the individual mandate is the only guarantee in actually funding the affordable care act?
 
maybe because the individual mandate is the only guarantee in actually funding the affordable care act?

..and that is just one of the many pretty obvious ways you know this law is crap.
 
well the law is what it is.

unless you have any better ideas at improving the law, the law stands as it is.

Why do I need better ideas? Why can't we just repeal a law that forces people into commerce and involuntary servitude? Why is that stance unacceptable?
 
Why do I need better ideas? Why can't we just repeal a law that forces people into commerce and involuntary servitude? Why is that stance unacceptable?

why not fix that one part and leave the rest of the law alone?

or better yet find a way to replace the mandate with somthing that encourages participation in the market place?
 
maybe because the individual mandate is the only guarantee in actually funding the affordable care act?

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, a young person without health insurance who works for a business that has 50 plus employees would, under Obamacare, be covered through employer provided insurance if the government didn't delay the implementation of that part of the act. As a result, that young person now has to seek insurance his/herself or pay a penalty. So, to use your logic, Obama and Sebilius shouldn't have given businesses the waiver because it is "the only guarantee in actually funding the affordable care act".

Where I come from, when a government passes a piece of legislation and it turns out there are serious problems in the implementation or the wording/provisions of the act, the government does the responsible thing and delays implementation until the bugs can be worked out.
 
Well, well, I do apologize. I must have missed that. Who were the Senate's conferees appointed to resolve differences between House and Senate resolutions?

it never got that far because the republicans or someone has been blocking attempts at making a conference committee.
 
well the law is what it is.

unless you have any better ideas at improving the law, the law stands as it is.

If insurance is so needed by the masses that they are begging to purchase it, why not make the purchase voluntary?
 
it never got that far because the republicans or someone has been blocking attempts at making a conference committee.

I'm not sure they have the ability to block the appointment of conferees. For the Dems, that would be Harry's purview...
 
why not fix that one part and leave the rest of the law alone?

or better yet find a way to replace the mandate with somthing that encourages participation in the market place?

Because I'm not just talking about the individual mandate. If you wanted to get rid of forced commerce and involuntary servitude the entity of the law has to be trashed.
 
You've stated the obvious, but not given a rationale for why Republicans would now be wise to lift the shutdown in order to conference with Senate Democrats. Perhaps you believe in the Obama method of negotiation, where you threaten and threaten and then back down when the rubber hits the road. It's been a disasterous strategy for Obama so why should Republicans take it up?

Republicans have two options now - either stand by the principles they were voted in to represent or cave in and simply vote in favor of what the White House and Democrats want. I hope they retain a backbone and stick to principles. If they do, over time, the blame will flip over to Obama and people will question why everyone else can get a delay in Obamacare implementation but the average citizen can't.

Good afternoon, CJ. :2wave:

It's already being questioned, because it's unfair. When unions, some businesses, and people raising money by bundling for the Dems can get an exemption from a law, but the average guy on the street can't, it does cause outraged indignation! Playing obvious favoritism is not a good-will maker under any scenario. Try giving one child more ice cream than another if you want to see what I mean! Even kids object to perceived favoritism. :lamo:
 
Good afternoon, CJ. :2wave:

It's already being questioned, because it's unfair. When unions, some businesses, and people raising money by bundling for the Dems can get an exemption from a law, but the average guy on the street can't, it does cause outraged indignation! Playing obvious favoritism is not a good-will maker under any scenario. Try giving one child more ice cream than another if you want to see what I mean! Even kids object to perceived favoritism. :lamo:

Good afternoon Lady P. - I'm still enjoying my global warming autumn here in the great white north - hope your weather is good too.
 
If insurance is so needed by the masses that they are begging to purchase it, why not make the purchase voluntary?

The mandate is needed because rates would increase if few people signed up. And getting rid of the mandate undercuts the entire affordable care act.
 
Good afternoon Lady P. - I'm still enjoying my global warming autumn here in the great white north - hope your weather is good too.

It was a perfect day here! Warm, nice breeze, and little humidity. I should write it down, because I just know I'll need to be reminded in a few months! :lamo:

Oddly, we have also had snow on this date. Years ago, when we got a horse and a pony for our kids from people who no longer wanted to be bothered with them, we were having a two-stall shed built for them. It snowed so hard for a while that the workers were grumbling that they couldn't see. They got it built, though, and it all took place on October 2! Memories from the past! :wow:
 
The mandate is needed because rates would increase if few people signed up. And getting rid of the mandate undercuts the entire affordable care act.

So, once again, some formerly free individuals are required to support strangers. Got it...
 
Back
Top Bottom