Government shuts down as Congress fails to prevent Funding Bill

[User]

 

WASHINGTON — A flurry of last-minute moves by the House, Senate and White House late Monday failed to break a bitter budget standoff over President Obama’s health care law, setting in motion the first government shutdown in nearly two decades.

After a series of rapid-fire back and forth legislative maneuvers, leaders of the House and Senate acknowledged there would not be a resolution in time to stop a shutdown before a midnight deadline, even as the House took steps to open talks. But Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, dismissed as game-playing the House proposal to begin conference committee negotiations.

Read More: Source

[Tokkemon]

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[CenSin]

I'm not a fan of Obamacare, but the Republicans should just let it pass clean already. Taking the entire country (maybe the world) hostage to win a battle lost in the past is just stupid.

[Grand Concourse]

If there weren't so many exemptions, especially for congress or whatever, then maybe it would be different. If everyone was forced on it, then it would be fair. So on that point I don't disagree on the shutdown.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I agree with the Republicans.  Obamacare will not help Americans who already can't afford healthcare.  I heard about the costs this morning on Good Day NY.  Over $2,000 a MONTH for a family for healthcare??? They call that affordable?? Ridiculous! That's a mortgage payment right there.  

[bobtehpanda]

I agree with the Republicans.  Obamacare will not help Americans who already can't afford healthcare.  I heard about the costs this morning on Good Day NY.  Over $2,000 a MONTH for a family for healthcare??? They call that affordable?? Ridiculous! That's a mortgage payment right there.  

 

Well, that may or may not be true, but you don't force people trying to make a living to go without pay to make an ideological point. People have shit to do. At least pass an extension of the budget if you're going to argue over the next one more.

 

Likewise, bludgeoning the Administration over the coming debt ceiling limit is extremely infantile. America has an obligation to its creditors to pay, and as responsible adults, they should allow the Administration to continue to pay their bondholders. It's the basic cornerstone of contract law. Republicans will end up causing the very confidence crisis they keep talking about whenever our national debt comes up, because America will be seen as a risky borrower that can't pay up.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well, that may or may not be true, but you don't force people trying to make a living to go without pay to make an ideological point. People have shit to do. At least pass an extension of the budget if you're going to argue over the next one more.

 

Likewise, bludgeoning the Administration over the coming debt ceiling limit is extremely infantile. America has an obligation to its creditors to pay, and as responsible adults, they should allow the Administration to continue to pay their bondholders. It's the basic cornerstone of contract law. Republicans will end up causing the very confidence crisis they keep talking about whenever our national debt comes up, because America will be seen as a risky borrower that can't pay up.

Well I don't see how it's any different that forcing people who can't afford healthcare to buy it.

[bobtehpanda]

Well I don't see how it's any different that forcing people who can't afford healthcare to buy it.

 

If you don't like the way your family does things, do you stop paying your mortgage?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If you don't like the way your family does things, do you stop paying your mortgage?

lol.... Huh?

[bobtehpanda]

lol.... Huh?

 

If you're a CEO and you disagree with the board of your company (i.e. Republicans disagreeing with Congress), do you close your offices and stop paying your creditors?

 

The point is, they can disagree over Obamacare, but they don't need to disrupt everyone else and break their obligations to do it. Part of politics involves actually governing.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If you're a CEO and you disagree with the board of your company (i.e. Republicans disagreeing with Congress), do you close your offices and stop paying your creditors?

 

The point is, they can disagree over Obamacare, but they don't need to disrupt everyone else and break their obligations to do it. Part of politics involves actually governing.

Yeah but the Congress isn't a "company".  This is wayyyy different than a household or a company.  Obamacare is going to destroy this country and I'm glad Republicans are trying to do something to stop this tyrant and his puppets in the House and Senate.

[CenSin]

I agree with the Republicans.  Obamacare will not help Americans who already can't afford healthcare.  I heard about the costs this morning on Good Day NY.  Over $2,000 a MONTH for a family for healthcare??? They call that affordable?? Ridiculous! That's a mortgage payment right there.  

As much as I'm against Obamacare, I do not like how the Republicans use this as an opportunity to win the battles they've long lost. If they want to repeal things, they should convince Americans to vote for them in enough numbers that they can dominate all the branches of government. (Good luck with that.) This isn't just about Obamacare; riding on the funding bills passed by the Republicans, they want to crush a bunch of other things that you and I benefit from like net neutrality. For those who don't know, Google it, but the basic idea is that internet service providers want to double-dip by charging both you and the sites/services you connect to. Pro-coroporate Republicans, are of course, happy to assist in any way since corporations and business-owning individuals line their pockets with bribesgifts. Any net neutrality is one amongst many.

 

EDIT: A good analogy that shows what a world with no net neutrality would be like:

• John uses AT&T as his phone service provider. He pays $40 a month for the service which lets him receive calls and make outgoing calls.
• Sarah uses Verizon as her phone service provider. She pays $40 a month for the service which also lets her receive calls and make outgoing calls.
• Verizon, however, is a bit greedy. It thinks that John should pay for the privlege of using Verizon's infrastructure to connect to Sarah whether he's calling her or receiving her calls. So not only will John pay for AT&T, but he will also receive charges from Verizon every time he calls Sarah or gets a call from her. If John chooses to make it impossible for Verizon to make these charges on his AT&T bill, Verizon will degrade his voice quality or refuse to connect his calls.

Those who oppose net neutrality: there's no way to make it right any way you dice it.

[MHV9218]

I agree with the Republicans.  Obamacare will not help Americans who already can't afford healthcare.  I heard about the costs this morning on Good Day NY.  Over $2,000 a MONTH for a family for healthcare??? They call that affordable?? Ridiculous! That's a mortgage payment right there.  

 

That's just inaccurate. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

As much as I'm against Obamacare, I do not like how the Republicans use this as an opportunity to win the battles they've long lost. If they want to repeal things, they should convince Americans to vote for them in enough numbers that they can dominate all the branches of government. (Good luck with that.) This isn't just about Obamacare; riding on the funding bills passed by the Republicans, they want to crush a bunch of other things that you and I benefit from like net neutrality. For those who don't know, Google it, but the basic idea is that internet service providers want to double-dip by charging both you and the sites/services you connect to. Pro-coroporate Republicans, are of course, happy to assist in any way since corporations and business-owning individuals line their pockets with bribesgifts. Any net neutrality is one amongst many.

lol... It's hard to win battles when the Democrats ram through a bill without any input from anyone else, and a large amount of Americans including myself are completely against "Osamacare".

 

That's just inaccurate. 

Really?  I think the numbers speak for themselves.

[MHV9218]

Really?  I think the numbers speak for themselves.

 

What numbers? 80% of Americans won't be changing anything insurance-wise. Of the 20% who do, the average cost (nationwide) for a plan with high deductibles is $249 per month. Then, on top of that you've got tax credits and the like to help the lower and middle class.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What numbers? 80% of Americans won't be changing anything insurance-wise. Of the 20% who do, the average cost (nationwide) for a plan with high deductibles is $249 per month. Then, on top of that you've got tax credits and the like to help the lower and middle class.

What's inaccurate about a family having to pay over $2,000 a month for healthcare?  Also, those lovely tax credits aren't free.  Those who earn more will have to pay more in taxes, trust me.  And how is it 80% of Americans when millions of Americans currently don't have health coverage?? 

[Grand Concourse]

As much as I'm against Obamacare, I do not like how the Republicans use this as an opportunity to win the battles they've long lost. If they want to repeal things, they should convince Americans to vote for them in enough numbers that they can dominate all the branches of government. (Good luck with that.) This isn't just about Obamacare; riding on the funding bills passed by the Republicans, they want to crush a bunch of other things that you and I benefit from like net neutrality. For those who don't know, Google it, but the basic idea is that internet service providers want to double-dip by charging both you and the sites/services you connect to. Pro-coroporate Republicans, are of course, happy to assist in any way since corporations and business-owning individuals line their pockets with bribesgifts. Any net neutrality is one amongst many.

 

EDIT: A good analogy that shows what a world with no net neutrality would be like:

• John uses AT&T as his phone service provider. He pays $40 a month for the service which lets him receive calls and make outgoing calls.
• Sarah uses Verizon as her phone service provider. She pays $40 a month for the service which also lets her receive calls and make outgoing calls.
• Verizon, however, is a bit greedy. It thinks that John should pay for the privlege of using Verizon's infrastructure to connect to Sarah whether he's calling her or receiving her calls. So not only will John pay for AT&T, but he will also receive charges from Verizon every time he calls Sarah or gets a call from her. If John chooses to make it impossible for Verizon to make these charges on his AT&T bill, Verizon will degrade his voice quality or refuse to connect his calls.

Those who oppose net neutrality: there's no way to make it right any way you dice it.

But this isn't an exclusive GOP tactic. It's been done in the past like with the Democrats against Reagan. Of course the media is likely quick to defend Obama since he's their guy.

=

As for the obamacare issue, it's seriously flawed if so many people have asked for exemptions including using religion. If not everyone wants it, then why is it 'so good' for the rest of us? If anything I'd like to know how many of the same politicians that voted for it are willing to opt in to it and give up what they currently have.

[Trainmaster5]

To those who decry the ACA aka Obamacare and are whining like babies....get over it. Elections have consequences. In the last presidential election there was a clear choice. The Republican candidate said he would do away with " Obama/Romneycare" on day one. The American voters chose the other candidate. Game. Set. Match. I've been alive since Harry Truman was President and I thought I'd seen everything. I've been on the winning or the losing side in many elections but this is the first time I have come to question the sanity and/or patriotism of some politicians. What part of 332-206 electoral votes is so hard to comprehend? Perhaps some House members are unaware of those election results? BTW, have the voters in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts voted to overturn "Romneycare" yet? Maybe they think it's a good thing after all. For an oldtimer like me I'll just say we heard the same arguments about Medicare back in the '60s. You can't find many elderly Americans who would give that up today, can you? Before I go let me say this. There are some people complaining about their tax dollars supporting someone else's health care under the ACA. Unless you are living under a rock your tax dollars are already paying for some or all of someone else's health care. Hospitals in NY don't turn away patients without insurance so your tax dollars are paying already. Don't all you people who preach personal responsibility want these people to get their own insurance? Help me out here. I'm also well aware that young people don't think they need health or life insurance and they sure don't want to pay for it. I was in that same frame of mind until I started losing friends and co-workers before their fortieth birthdays. Follow the Boy Scout motto." Be prepared". For anything life may throw at you.  We may not agree politically but refusing to compromise and causing a government shutdown because of ACA borders on extreme stupidity ,IMO.Carry on.

[Urbanfortitude]

This is ridiculous.  Forget about ACA even being involved.  To be willing to go this far on any bill just speaks volumes.  But considering the way things have gone in the last few years I'm not even surprised.  I'm just ashamed.  This is akin to "I can't have my way so we'll make sure nobody does", basically a 2 year old tantrum being thrown by adults.  And at the end of the day they still get their pay so heaven forbid they suffer like the rest of us.

 

 

lol... It's hard to win battles when the Democrats ram through a bill without any input from anyone else, and a large amount of Americans including myself are completely against "Osamacare".

 

 

 

Did you really just call it Osamacare? At least argue your point with some maturity.

[bobtehpanda]

Yeah but the Congress isn't a "company".  This is wayyyy different than a household or a company.  Obamacare is going to destroy this country and I'm glad Republicans are trying to do something to stop this tyrant and his puppets in the House and Senate.

 

Oh please. The Republicans are going to destroy investors' faith in the United States and possibly cause a run on US debt, but it's okay because of a healthcare plan that the majority of people didn't think was a big enough problem to decide the presidential election?

 

Stupid shenanigans from both left and right are the reason why the United States government barely functions.

This is ridiculous.  Forget about ACA even being involved.  To be willing to go this far on any bill just speaks volumes.  But considering the way things have gone in the last few years I'm not even surprised.  I'm just ashamed.  This is akin to "I can't have my way so we'll make sure nobody does", basically a 2 year old tantrum being thrown by adults.  And at the end of the day they still get their pay so heaven forbid they suffer like the rest of us.

 

It's very interesting how Congress likes to protect its own perks - they protected the program that subsidizes flights to small towns during sequestering, even though subsidies are at least $100 or $1000 per ticket.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Just because Obama won the majority doesn't mean the rest of us who didn't vote for him agree with this ridiculous plan and it's unpatriotic to strip away people's rights to choose. Furthermore these plans are not exactly cheap, so forcing Americans to buy plans that they can't afford is just making things more difficult for the people that this is supposed to "help".

[Trainmaster5]

@ VG8  Seems that that old axiom of "majority rules" only applies when you are in the majority, correct? That's not how I remember those civics lessons of yesteryear. I still maintain that President Obama would not have won re-election if the majority of voters were against ACA. The defining difference between the candidates was the ACA. And the election wasn't even close. Game. Set. Match.

[MTARegional Bus]

The question is how are the poor going to afford ACA? what about the people that are unemployment?  Keep in mind not every state will have medicaid expansion since most GOP Governors will reject that idea in there state ,seems like the Democrats like to tell you positives of ACA but not the negative, which I kind of Bother me.don't get me wrong there some thing that I like about ACA like being on your parents insurance until 27 and the fact that insurance can't reject for a preexisting condition, but for someone to be force insurance like you were an automobile? come one.

 

As for the shutdown both sides are to blame.  

[Urbanfortitude]

The question is how are the poor going to afford ACA? what about the people that are unemployment?  Keep in mind not every state will have medicaid expansion since most GOP Governors will reject that idea in there state ,seems like the Democrats like to tell you positives of ACA but not the negative, which I kind of Bother me.don't get me wrong there some thing that I like about ACA like being on your parents insurance until 27 and the fact that insurance can't reject for a preexisting condition, but for someone to be force insurance like you were an automobile? come one.

 

As for the shutdown both sides are to blame.  

 

At this point I'm more worried about us having a functioning government period.  The thing about legislature is it can be amended.  And a functioning government wouldn't have a problem amending legislature that needs such.  It might even be easier to make changes once its actually in effect.  I'd actually welcome this approach if I had any sort of faith in our current group of monkeys.

[MTARegional Bus]

At this point I'm more worried about us having a functioning government period.  The thing about legislature is it can be amended.  And a functioning government wouldn't have a problem amending legislature that needs such.  It might even be easier to make changes once its actually in effect.  I'd actually welcome this approach if I had any sort of faith in our current group of monkeys.

 

same here. not the mention raising the debt ceiling on the 17th Which I have a feeling they will try the end the government shutdown around the same time frame. 

 

Thanks GOP.