Sorry for the threadjack, Elok. Shutdown talk here.

[Aeson]

See the thing is... Democrats don't even have the option to negotiate. Their only choice is to... do what Republicans want them to do. But why would they do that? Republican senators are not their constituents. They are in Congress to represent the interests of their districts/states. Some percentage of America wants to keep the ACA healthcare subsidies, and if we live in a representative democracy then some representatives have a duty to advocate for that (or try to convince their constituents why keeping the subsidies is not in their interest).

Which is why, demonstrably, neither the Democrats or Republicans want to get rid of the filibuster. It's not an actual option. Once it's gone, there would be wild policy swings every election.

Both can open the government by conceeding to the other side. Neither has budged yet. Both have thus chosen to shut down the government.

I happen to agree with the D's reason for shutting down the government, and hope they don't conceed. I find the R's reason repugnant.

[Lorizael]

I definitely think assigning blame misses the point. It's far more productive to accurately and impartially highlight their respective demands. I also do *not* want to see the Republicans use the so-called nuclear option or suggest that they are somehow more blameworthy for not having done so.

In fact, assigning blame is the entire point. Shutdowns are stupid, fake games of chicken we invented for no other reason than to gain political leverage by holding government services hostage. They don't have to happen and didn't until 50 years ago. Before instant and mass communication, the spectacle of a government shutdown wouldn't have provided meaningful leverage.

[Geronimo]

I've consistently blamed the party with less control in each of these federal shutdowns, since that party generally has the greatest distance to close to get their agenda passed but I'll agree that I'm more sympathetic to the demands of the Dems in this case than the Republicans if only because the means-tested insurance subsidies that are ending would not be necessary at all if it was a single payer system which the Dems have clearly always favored but if we had a totally free market health care system as the Republicans favor it's hard to see how lower income residents would ever be able to afford any healthcare. Either offer the subsidies, or reform the system but don't leave it broken and rip out all of the stitches holding the patient together.

[N35t0r]

And in most normal countries, the failure to pass a budget just means previous year's budgets are extended (sometimes including a snap election). This whole shutting down of the government except for certain people who still have to work for free is downright ridiculous.

[Lorizael]

I've consistently blamed the party with less control in each of these federal shutdowns, since that party generally has the greatest distance to close to get their agenda passed...

I'm sorry, man, but this is just arguing that the minority party (which represents ~half~ the country) should have no say. The framers were very clear that straight majoritarian government was not what they wanted, which is why, for example, we have a senate at all.

[Dauphin]

I think the position that one side or other is at fault because one party or other has more seats / votes is facile. It's a negotiation with two parties. Either or both can be at fault.

A more nuanced position is that you assess the stances and ask who is being more reasonable and then assign blame (e.g. one party won't negotiate over their right to kill puppies and the other won't negotiate on saving puppies from being killed), but then you end up saying the party that you don't support is at fault because, well of course your position is more reasonable.

My stance is that the impasse will end when one party or both parties sees less advantage (relatively or absolutely) in letting it continue, compared to giving up whatever they need to give up, or winning want they want to win, in order to end the impasses. i.e. both parties are at fault because it's clear that neither party is incentivized or disadvantaged enough to end it. Politicking on who is to blame (or things like privately funding military pay) is just part of that equation, and leveraging a better final negotiating position in the tug of war.

I feel like I am stating the obvious. Sorry if this is all obvious to everyone.

[-Jrabbit]

Of course it's obvious. But the reality is, the GOP refuses to negotiate. At all. The administration feels they are entitled to rule by fiat.

The fact is that the Dem's "demand" is simply the maintenance of existing, well-established programs. Namely, ACA premium support for health insurance, and SNAP, which is food assistance for poverty-stricken people. Frankly, it's a bare minimum "social safety net" at that. Oh, and 75% of those benefitting from them live in red states. It's a dick move to hold people's health care hostage, full stop.

Looking at the modest price tag involved, especially in light the administration's outrageous embrace of massive deficit spending, I think it's fair to say the GOP is just being dicks, likely at the behest of folks like Stephen Miller and others of his ilk. It's important to remember that the GOP already did the deed in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill, so they are clearly the ones taking programs away from people who need them, with no plan (like, say, a freaking health care plan) to address the problems they are causing.

The Democrats are correctly advocating for the support of proven, successful, and very popular programs, doing their job as the loyal opposition. They have no reason to roll over.

Make no mistake about it, Sloww, the Republicans are 100% at fault for the shutdown.

Tonight, Trump called for the nuclear option. I expect the Senate to roll over. And tens of millions will lose their health insurance while everyone else ends up with significantly higher premiums due to the loss of younger, relatively healthy people from the insurance actuarial pool. Oh, and poor people will starve. But hey, tough break: try not being poor, eh?

[SlowwHand]

I asked a question. Big deal.
Lorizael started this thread.
Anyone that wants to continue to flame me over him being a candyass, that's fine.
I can take it. I just want it noted.

[Lorizael]

I did note it? Not sure I'm being a candyass or that you're being flamed, though. I believe what's happening is that people are responding to you and engaging in debate.

For posterity: Slowwhand did not start this thread or choose the thread name. I abused my leftover moderator powers and branched it off from here: https://apolyton.net/forum/miscellan...-south-america, where Sloww was responding to this post:

Just because the government is shut down doesn't mean we can't piss away money on this.

[Geronimo]

Of course it's obvious. But the reality is, the GOP refuses to negotiate. At all. The administration feels they are entitled to rule by fiat.

The fact is that the Dem's "demand" is simply the maintenance of existing, well-established programs. Namely, ACA premium support for health insurance, and SNAP, which is food assistance for poverty-stricken people. Frankly, it's a bare minimum "social safety net" at that. Oh, and 75% of those benefitting from them live in red states. It's a dick move to hold people's health care hostage, full stop.

Looking at the modest price tag involved, especially in light the administration's outrageous embrace of massive deficit spending, I think it's fair to say the GOP is just being dicks, likely at the behest of folks like Stephen Miller and others of his ilk. It's important to remember that the GOP already did the deed in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill, so they are clearly the ones taking programs away from people who need them, with no plan (like, say, a freaking health care plan) to address the problems they are causing.

The Democrats are correctly advocating for the support of proven, successful, and very popular programs, doing their job as the loyal opposition. They have no reason to roll over.

Make no mistake about it, Sloww, the Republicans are 100% at fault for the shutdown.

Tonight, Trump called for the nuclear option. I expect the Senate to roll over. And tens of millions will lose their health insurance while everyone else ends up with significantly higher premiums due to the loss of younger, relatively healthy people from the insurance actuarial pool. Oh, and poor people will starve. But hey, tough break: try not being poor, eh?

how is willingness to negotiate measured? how is a "modest" price tag measured? is 126 billion modest? I would also say that while it might make some kind of Machiavellian amoral political sense to block an important benefit and "hold it hostage", figuratively speaking, to gain concessions from that benefit's stakeholders and those who represent them I would argue that it does not appear that Republicans are doing this at all. What concessions are they demanding in exchange for releasing these benefits that are being held hostage? Instead they are doing it to pander to their perceived base and avoid looking weak in their primaries.

I would agree however, that in the shutdown it is fair to say the GOP is just being dicks. A great deal of money is at stake yes but unless they move to repeal laws that require emergency room treatment of anyone regardless of ability to pay, there is no way that removing the subsidies will save money or accomplish anything at all for their constituents or for the country or for their future power prospects.

[-Jrabbit]

I would suggest that shutting down the government is more than sufficient evidence of a refusal to negotiate. The GOP is working hard to blame the Democrats, gambling (unsuccessfully, so far) that they can swing public opinion their way despite what they did with ramming the OBBB and its massive deficits down our collective throats.

[Geronimo]

the problem is the Dems popularity is tanking from the shutdown as well. I do not want to gamble on ultra-low turnout elections reigning in the Trump administration.

[The Mad Monk]

They weren't tanking yesterday.

[Geronimo]

I suspect that Trump wants the nuclear option during the next year and that may be the decisive factor in this particular Republican stupidity playing out the way it has.

[The Mad Monk]

All I want to say is, if this gets rid of the filibuster in it's current incarnation, then maybe we can say that one good thing has come out of this mess. That the Republicans will take 100% of the blame for what happens after this is just icing on the cake.

[The Mad Monk]

II am dependent on ACA for survival. I cannot afford my diabetes meds without it. Nevertheless, the transformation of the filibuster to it's current form was relatively recent in our nations' history, and one born out of out Senators' laziness.

[-Jrabbit]

It's not laziness; it's fear of accountability in the next election cycle.

[The Mad Monk]

Senators used to filibuster by standing up and speaking for hours on end; it was a bold move and I sincerely doubt that any senator ever lost their seat due to that. It's laziness, pure and simple.

[Broken_Erika]

Top Republican rebuffs Trump calls to axe filibuster rule in shutdown standoff

The top Republican in the US Senate has pushed back on Donald Trump's call to scrap the chamber's filibuster rule in a bid to end the ongoing government shutdown, now entering its 30th day.
The filibuster is a long-standing rule requiring 60 of the 100 members to approve most legislation. With a 53-47 majority, removing the rule would allow Republicans to pass a funding bill without Democratic support.
“It is now time for the Republicans to play their ‘TRUMP CARD,’ and go for what is called the Nuclear Option - Get rid of the Filibuster, and get rid of it, NOW,” Trump wrote on social media.
A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader John Thune said his opposition to doing that remains "unchanged".

The shutdown, which began on 1 October, has left millions of Americans facing the loss of essential services.
If it continues into the weekend, more than 40 million people could have lost access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), which provides food aid to low-income households,
On Friday, however, a federal judge in Rhode Island blocked the Trump administration from halting that food aid, arguing that doing so would likely be unlawful.
Thousands of federal workers have already missed pay cheques, and there are growing fears of increased flight delays as air traffic controllers and airport staff work without pay.
Thune has previously rejected calls to change the filibuster rule to end the shutdown.
"Leader Thune's position on the importance of the legislative filibuster is unchanged," Ryan Wrasse, Thune's communications director, said in a statement to CBS News, the BBC's US partner.
Lawmakers from both political parties have long expressed concerns that scrapping it would erode a key safeguard for the minority party.
“Well, now WE are in power, and if we did what we should be doing, it would IMMEDIATELY end this ridiculous, Country destroying ‘SHUT DOWN,’” Trump wrote in a social media post late on Thursday evening.
By Friday, most senators had left Washington for the weekend, with little sign of progress towards reopening the government.
It remains unclear whether there is enough support within the Senate to invoke what is known as the "nuclear option" and eliminate the filibuster.

• Five ways US government shutdown is hurting - and why it's about to get worse

In recent years, both parties have chipped away at filibuster's reach.
During former President Joe Biden’s administration, some Democrats suggested ending the filibuster to enshrine abortion access and protect voting rights, but it did not get sufficient support within the party.
The senate has already made exceptions so that some nominees, including judicial appointments, only need a simple majority vote for confirmation. But most legislation remains subject to the 60-vote threshold.
Many Republicans fear that ending the filibuster could backfire if Democrats regain control of Congress.
The shutdown went into effect on 1 October after Democrats refused to support a stopgap measure to keep the government open until mid-November, unless Republicans agreed to extend healthcare subsidies for low-income Americans.
Republicans have resisted, accusing Democrats of holding the government hostage over unrelated policy priorities.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1d0qwx5z2vo

[SlowwHand]

SNAP is back. Now if they'll stop giving growing increments on number of children...since it helps promote having 10 kids.

[The Mad Monk]

...so you want us to age out of existence?

[-Jrabbit]

Apparently he still thinks that welfare queens are a thing. Perhaps they turned back the clocks to 1972 in Texas.

[Broken_Erika]

https://www.whitehouse.gov/mysafespace/