Democrats cannot make a deal with a counterparty who can't be trusted to stick to that deal. Also, how the next few weeks could determine the fate of the filibuster.
The Senate is inherently anti democratic and the filibuster only exacerbates that. It should be abolished and the Democrats should tell the Republicans they will join in the abolition. That way the Democrats not only would be on the side of democracy, it will also be crystal clear that the Republicans are entirely to blame for the shutdown.
Not only is the Senate anti-democratic, but through its special powers of "advise and consent" it spreads a lasting anti-democratic taint. Think of all the harm that Chuck Grassley has done through his forty four years in the Senate.
250 years ago, Did the rag tag, under- armed American military fear death while marching towards the well suited and well armed British military at Concord and beyond?
Democrats fear for their lives but they don’t use that as an excuse to refuse to do their jobs. Just ask Nancy Pelosi how terrifying it is to have your spouse brutally attacked. She is an 85 year old woman but actual violence against a loved one hasn’t stopped her from speaking out. Compare that to my 65 year old Republican Senator Thom Tillis. There were widespread reports in the media that Tillis was telling them he and his fellow tough guy Republicans are too intimidated by all the threats they are getting that they can’t do the right thing and are afraid to go to town halls.
Republicans are also afraid to do the right thing because they will get primaried and lose their seats. Many Dems who vote for the ACA knowing they were going to lose their seats. That is why Claire McCaskill and Kathy Hochul are no longer in Congress.
"And yes, I recognize that if you can’t trust them to spend the resources they agree to, why trust them when they pinky-swear this time they will? There’s no great answer for that but, again, these agreements are legislation, as in “laws.” If you break them, you can and should be sued."
The problem with suing the government is that WE pay for our AGs or other entities to sue the feds, AND we pay for the DOJ to defend their illegal moves. What happens when that money is gone, as it appears it will be soon? Taxpayers are about to have the rug pulled out from under us; you can't get blood from stones, particularly the ones you have fired from good civil service jobs.
Speculation… an endless list of “what ifs,” and chaos helps no one, if the market stumbles, it might keep stumbling…the Republicans appear divided… go to the gym, an extra cup of coffee, chant your mantra …
Here’s a contrafactual or whatever: Maybe the party that’s been working for over a hundred years to shrink government actually wants a shutdown in order to shrink government a little bit more. And the dividend to that is making the Democrats look even worse.
And not unrelated, something that burns my aged butt is conflating or confusing Trump and his party. The Venn diagram of shit Trump’s pulling anf long time Republican goals shows huge overlap. Crediting him for following the old GOP playbook builds him up which, you know, isn’t a good thing.
The current CR is a clean bill except for the addition of more money for security for Congress, the Supreme Court and the Executive branch. Senate Ds cannot hope for a better bill to keep the government open and should take it. I expect there will be multiple future CRs as Rs need Ds to avoid getting rid of the filibuster. I think that enough Rs will back the extension of the ACA enhanced subsidies through next year to avoid blowback in the mid-terms. The new budget may very well break the filibuster but a government shutdown would be a self-inflicted wound for America and should be blamed on the Ds since it is a clean CR. I really think the House passed it as a queen's gambit to get the Senate Ds to give them cover to shut the government and let Trump and DOGE further decimate the civil service since Senate Ds have been signaling they won't pass the CR without multiple demands that Rs won't agree with.
As an aside, I certainly HOPE that Ds are holding out for restoration of cuts to Medicaid as well as ACA subsidies - lately there has been no mention of Medicaid.
But I am showing my ignorance here on the filibuster - I am surprised to read that the filibuster should go as anti-democratic and that the majority of readers here support that view.
I had always understood that both parties thought that ending the filibuster was a step too far and an invitation for the majority party to ram through one-sided legislation without any support from the minority party.
Totally fair question. There's a lot on the web on this, with arguments from both sides. Ezra Klein has long been making cogent arguments for "de-filibustering." It was originally devised to make sure less populated states got a fair say but we're now giving voters in those states hugely disproportionate representation in the Senate.
But bottom line, if you agree with me that the US gov't is and has been quite highly dysfunctional for awhile (a timely observation today!), I can confidently assert that the filibuster is a big reason for that.
I understand what you are saying. I agree that US government is highly dysfunctional. But…
You may believe more in bipartisanship than I do. I believe the R party has historically been the party that is undemocratic and corrupt. So I worry more about what Rs can do if in the majority than I do about lost opportunities if Democrats are in the majority.
But you have a long and distinguished record in government and certainly know better than I how politics work. So if you say it’s time to end the filibuster, then I will follow along.
would a modified filibuster work? instead of 60 votes, make the needed votes represent 60% of the population according to the Census Bureau..This still preserves the basic value of the approach...only more representative of the country as a whole. It also protects the Census from attacks that weaken its accuracy.
" The SCOTUS conservatives, ftr, didn’t rule on the law. They ignored, as is their wont these days, the merits of the case, and ruled for the admin on a technical, who-has-standing-to-bring-the-case issue."
How can we expect justice in a land where the chief executive proudly flouts the law and the majority of the justices of the Supreme Court have a heavy finger on the scales of justice favoring that chief executive?
Apropos of nothing, I have to thank you for helping me to remember the name of an author and his works that I’d been wracking my brain over for a while! Allen Drury, who wrote political thriller “Advise and Consent” back in 1959. It somehow seems relevant today in an indirect sort of way. 😬🫤🤔📎
The Senate is inherently anti democratic and the filibuster only exacerbates that. It should be abolished and the Democrats should tell the Republicans they will join in the abolition. That way the Democrats not only would be on the side of democracy, it will also be crystal clear that the Republicans are entirely to blame for the shutdown.
Not only is the Senate anti-democratic, but through its special powers of "advise and consent" it spreads a lasting anti-democratic taint. Think of all the harm that Chuck Grassley has done through his forty four years in the Senate.
I’d like to see a list of winners and losers from a Federal Government shutdown. I know my daughter,
a federal employee, isn’t on the winners side.
They say a crisis is a terrible thing to waste- but somehow it doesn’t
work out so well for those that play by the rules.
Do Republicons actually fear for their lives?
250 years ago, Did the rag tag, under- armed American military fear death while marching towards the well suited and well armed British military at Concord and beyond?
Democrats fear for their lives but they don’t use that as an excuse to refuse to do their jobs. Just ask Nancy Pelosi how terrifying it is to have your spouse brutally attacked. She is an 85 year old woman but actual violence against a loved one hasn’t stopped her from speaking out. Compare that to my 65 year old Republican Senator Thom Tillis. There were widespread reports in the media that Tillis was telling them he and his fellow tough guy Republicans are too intimidated by all the threats they are getting that they can’t do the right thing and are afraid to go to town halls.
Republicans are also afraid to do the right thing because they will get primaried and lose their seats. Many Dems who vote for the ACA knowing they were going to lose their seats. That is why Claire McCaskill and Kathy Hochul are no longer in Congress.
I sure hope so. We've lived in a constant state of fear since January 20th.
"And yes, I recognize that if you can’t trust them to spend the resources they agree to, why trust them when they pinky-swear this time they will? There’s no great answer for that but, again, these agreements are legislation, as in “laws.” If you break them, you can and should be sued."
The problem with suing the government is that WE pay for our AGs or other entities to sue the feds, AND we pay for the DOJ to defend their illegal moves. What happens when that money is gone, as it appears it will be soon? Taxpayers are about to have the rug pulled out from under us; you can't get blood from stones, particularly the ones you have fired from good civil service jobs.
Speculation… an endless list of “what ifs,” and chaos helps no one, if the market stumbles, it might keep stumbling…the Republicans appear divided… go to the gym, an extra cup of coffee, chant your mantra …
...and stick your head in the sand until you can no longer afford insurance, electricity, and gas.
Here’s a contrafactual or whatever: Maybe the party that’s been working for over a hundred years to shrink government actually wants a shutdown in order to shrink government a little bit more. And the dividend to that is making the Democrats look even worse.
And not unrelated, something that burns my aged butt is conflating or confusing Trump and his party. The Venn diagram of shit Trump’s pulling anf long time Republican goals shows huge overlap. Crediting him for following the old GOP playbook builds him up which, you know, isn’t a good thing.
The current CR is a clean bill except for the addition of more money for security for Congress, the Supreme Court and the Executive branch. Senate Ds cannot hope for a better bill to keep the government open and should take it. I expect there will be multiple future CRs as Rs need Ds to avoid getting rid of the filibuster. I think that enough Rs will back the extension of the ACA enhanced subsidies through next year to avoid blowback in the mid-terms. The new budget may very well break the filibuster but a government shutdown would be a self-inflicted wound for America and should be blamed on the Ds since it is a clean CR. I really think the House passed it as a queen's gambit to get the Senate Ds to give them cover to shut the government and let Trump and DOGE further decimate the civil service since Senate Ds have been signaling they won't pass the CR without multiple demands that Rs won't agree with.
As an aside, I certainly HOPE that Ds are holding out for restoration of cuts to Medicaid as well as ACA subsidies - lately there has been no mention of Medicaid.
But I am showing my ignorance here on the filibuster - I am surprised to read that the filibuster should go as anti-democratic and that the majority of readers here support that view.
I had always understood that both parties thought that ending the filibuster was a step too far and an invitation for the majority party to ram through one-sided legislation without any support from the minority party.
Totally fair question. There's a lot on the web on this, with arguments from both sides. Ezra Klein has long been making cogent arguments for "de-filibustering." It was originally devised to make sure less populated states got a fair say but we're now giving voters in those states hugely disproportionate representation in the Senate.
But bottom line, if you agree with me that the US gov't is and has been quite highly dysfunctional for awhile (a timely observation today!), I can confidently assert that the filibuster is a big reason for that.
You are very kind to reply.
I understand what you are saying. I agree that US government is highly dysfunctional. But…
You may believe more in bipartisanship than I do. I believe the R party has historically been the party that is undemocratic and corrupt. So I worry more about what Rs can do if in the majority than I do about lost opportunities if Democrats are in the majority.
But you have a long and distinguished record in government and certainly know better than I how politics work. So if you say it’s time to end the filibuster, then I will follow along.
I agree. End the filibuster and make the Republicans own the mess.
would a modified filibuster work? instead of 60 votes, make the needed votes represent 60% of the population according to the Census Bureau..This still preserves the basic value of the approach...only more representative of the country as a whole. It also protects the Census from attacks that weaken its accuracy.
" The SCOTUS conservatives, ftr, didn’t rule on the law. They ignored, as is their wont these days, the merits of the case, and ruled for the admin on a technical, who-has-standing-to-bring-the-case issue."
How can we expect justice in a land where the chief executive proudly flouts the law and the majority of the justices of the Supreme Court have a heavy finger on the scales of justice favoring that chief executive?
Apropos of nothing, I have to thank you for helping me to remember the name of an author and his works that I’d been wracking my brain over for a while! Allen Drury, who wrote political thriller “Advise and Consent” back in 1959. It somehow seems relevant today in an indirect sort of way. 😬🫤🤔📎