Going over the Cliff

[ordnance11]

Well. it looks like the House Republicans have decided to let sequestration come into effect.
Here's what happens to me personally:
1.  I come in the morning, get my matching orders, drop everything I have into the office that I signed for. And then we lock the office down.
2. Get the last paycheck due to me next Friday.
3. Hopefully we go back to work by the 7th and Congress decided to pay us for the lost time.
It's depressing but at the same time not surprising. Democracy is truly a terrible form of government. Except there's nothing else better.
Oh, and Happy New Year. Ugh!
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Dartz]

In other words, how to make sure tax increases and spending cuts go through that appeal to both parties while at the same time allowing neither to take responsibility for them.

Meanwhile, whoever swoops in to fix the mess by 'compromising' makes a political killing by 'fixing the crisis'.

Sometimes I like my government. It can do things fast. Sometimes it does the wrong thing, but at least it does something. When it has to.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[ordnance11]

When a significant faction of one party decides they'd rather be "pure" and winning the primary is a sure fire way to stay in power..*shrug*
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[khagler]

There are no spending cuts in the sense that normal people use the words. When politicians in the US talk about spending cuts, they're actually talking about a smaller spending increase. For example, if they were going to increase spending in the next year by $5 trillion, and instead decide to increase it by $4.99 trillion, that constitutes a "spending cut" in politician-speak.

[ordnance11]

Well we went over the cliff..with a deal in hand, Back to work.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ordnance11]

And we're back right were we started from. I am now utterly convinced that the Tea Baggers, the people who support them and the people who voted for them are hooked on something. Obamacare was judged constitutional, the president won a second term with control of the Senate. The had their chance and they lost. So now they'll bring the government shutdown unless the president defunds his signature first term achievement. They're crazy if they think the president they'll agree to it and they're even more crazier if they think there will be no backlash to the GOP from this. I am willing to bet that this will the moment when the GOP starts ceases to be a national party. Either the koooks decide to form a splinter party or the sane people forms another party. Might be even both.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Black Aeronaut]

It's looking pretty bad here in Texas. I haven't heard the official word yet, but Wendy Davis, the Democrat famous for her marathon filibuster in the state senate against the abortion bill, may run for Governor. And the Republican political machine is already gearing up for what is looking to be the nastiest bout of mudslinging in the State's history.

And to top it all off, Mr. 'Good Hair' Perry is trying to make the roll out of Obama Care in Texas as difficult as possible. I pray that this is merely the last gasp of his political career, because I seriously doubt he's gonna get elected to anything after this.

[Morganite]

Given the way the polls show more and more people don't want Obamacare, wouldn't you expect opposing it to be good for someone's political career?

Seriously, wouldn't you think that if people wanted Obamacare funded that badly, the Democrats would control the House? Why is it all that surprising when Republicans do what their constituents want?

-Morgan.

[Rajvik]

Actually, and i say this as one of those "Kooks", let them shut the government down, unlike what the democrats and the talking heads of the liberal media, (and 99.9% of the US media is liberal biased mind you) would have you believe, shutting down the government is not going to end the social security checks, its not going to end the paychecks to the military, and its not going to stop the welfare checks. all the necesary functions are going to still be there regardless of what the fear mongers are screaming. What it is going to do is send 2/3s of the beurocrats home and let the actual necessity of people get the business of running the government done. Now over the last 6 years the house has sent the senate at least 10 budgets most of which allowed obamacare to be funded, the senate has deep sixed every bloody one of them for various reasons. Sequestration was Obama's comprimise, not the republicans, he just was dumb enough to think that the republicans would worry so much about funding the military that they would give him the social welfare blank check he wanted in a new budget back last year and not take the sequestration, WRONG.

Dont bluff, especially when your not even holding cards.
 

[Dartz]

It seems like utter lunacy to me.... to continuously keep beating on the door of one single issue rather than actually bothering to run the country.

Still. I'll be in DC at the end of next month. It might make for an interesting trip - or a dull one if all the museums are shut. Be fucking typical that.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[Werehawk]

Obama's current political capital is pretty tenuous too say the least.

Particularly after the entire Syria issue in which Vladimir Putin gave him a not too welcome way out of the debacle he'd gotten himself into.

Nor does his doing a speech attacking Republicans at the very same time the Navy yard mass shooting was still unsettled help things...
--Werehawk--
My mom's brief take on upcoming Guatemalan Elections "In last throes of preelection activities. Much loudspeaker vote pleading."

[Morganite]

It seems like utter lunacy to me.... to continuously keep beating on the door of one single issue rather than actually bothering to run the country.

It's a big issue. Leaving aside any directly healthcare-related concerns, a lot of people are worried about the various firings and hour-cuttings that are already happening in response to different provisions in the bill. (I find it more than slightly alarming that something which purports to improve health care is leading to so many people who work in the field losing their jobs. Not that it's just them being hit. I've never been so glad to work for a large company.)

-Morgan.

[ECSNorway]

Morganni wrote:

---

Dartz wrote:

---

It seems like utter lunacy to me.... to continuously keep beating on the door of one single issue rather than actually bothering to run the country.

It's a big issue. Leaving aside any directly healthcare-related concerns, a lot of people are worried about the various firings and hour-cuttings that are already happening in response to different provisions in the bill. (I find it more than slightly alarming that something which purports to improve health care is leading to so many people who work in the field losing their jobs. Not that it's just them being hit. I've never been so glad to work for a large company.)

-Morgan.

It's a pretty vital issue to me. I'd even call it life-threatening. Without insurance paying for my treatment -- and I've had one insurer try to call my condition "cosmetic" in the past -- I would spend what little would remain of my life in crippling pain, barely able to shuffle around like a 90-year-old, with every inch of my skin suffering the constant equivalent of borderline second-degree burns that NEVER HEAL. My health insurance is currently paying an utterly ridiculous amount of money to treat this condition (hint: it's about -double- my annual salary). Anything that threatens my access to health insurance willing to pay for that treatment, at a reasonable premium to me, is a direct attack on my LIFE. 
If Obamacare was a real solution, was actually going to provide worthwhile coverage... why is Congress exempt from it? Why are so many of the big labor unions, Obama's own biggest supporters, actively opposing it? 
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.

[Dartz]

All laws and programs have unintended consequences. Everything a government does (Or for that matter avoids doing) causes some form of unintended consequence. As much as a Program creates some unforeseen difficulty, the only effect of repealing that program entirely will be to revert to a known status quo that is known to be broken. Therefore that program should - rather than be annihilated entirely which will remove any positive effects the program has had - be amended to correct the flaws that have appeared.

If a Program causes a problem, then perhaps amend the program to include tax-breaks for companies who hire more full-time employees, or make some of the costs of healthcare a partial tax-write-off or any number of things - or a dozen other options. (Why not make insurance costs a tax-writeoff for whoever pays it then? Since paying for it is mandatory...).

Never mind that doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results is a mark of lunacy. What would happen in a functioning democracy is that somebody would propose an amendment like that - in some form or another - both sides would compromise to cover both their agendas as best as possible to find the solution that theoretically fits the will of the majority of people and the edifice rumbles along.
________________________________
--m(^0^)m-- Wot, no sig?

[ordnance11]

Morganni wrote:

---

Given the way the polls show more and more people don't want Obamacare, wouldn't you expect opposing it to be good for someone's political career?

Seriously, wouldn't you think that if people wanted Obamacare funded that badly, the Democrats would control the House? Why is it all that surprising when Republicans do what their constituents want?

-Morgan.

Morgan, I do not have the breakdown of the poll of those who do not want Obamacare, but a good portion of those who oppose it are liberals who do not think it goes far enough. And the I really would like to see a poll who reasons for their opposition. Medicare and Medicaid also had their opponents, but you don't see widespread opposition to them.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ordnance11]

Rajvik wrote:

---

Actually, and i say this as one of those "Kooks", let them shut the government down, unlike what the democrats and the talking heads of the liberal media, (and 99.9% of the US media is liberal biased mind you) would have you believe, shutting down the government is not going to end the social security checks, its not going to end the paychecks to the military, and its not going to stop the welfare checks. all the necesary functions are going to still be there regardless of what the fear mongers are screaming. What it is going to do is send 2/3s of the beurocrats home and let the actual necessity of people get the business of running the government done. Now over the last 6 years the house has sent the senate at least 10 budgets most of which allowed obamacare to be funded, the senate has deep sixed every bloody one of them for various reasons. Sequestration was Obama's comprimise, not the republicans, he just was dumb enough to think that the republicans would worry so much about funding the military that they would give him the social welfare blank check he wanted in a new budget back last year and not take the sequestration, WRONG.

Dont bluff, especially when your not even holding cards.

What is going to be still running are parts of the government that are essential to the security of the country. Period. From a website I googgled' here's the rundown:

Inconvenienced Citizens

• Medicare: Some 400,000 newly eligible Medicare recipients were delayed in applying for the program.

• Social Security: Claims from 112,000 new Social Security
  applicants were not processed. 212,000 new or replacement Social
  Security cards were not issued. 360,000 office visits were denied.
  800,000 toll-free calls for information were not answered.

• Healthcare: New patients were not accepted into clinical
  research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) clinical center. The
  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ceased disease surveillance
  and hotline calls to NIH concerning diseases were not answered.

• Environment: Toxic waste clean-up work at 609 sites stopped as 2,400 Superfund workers were sent home.

• Law Enforcement and Public Safety: Delays occurred in the
  processing of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives applications by
  the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; work on more than 3,500
  bankruptcy cases reportedly was suspended; cancellation of the
  recruitment and testing of federal law enforcement officials reportedly
  occurred, including the hiring of 400 border patrol agents; and
  delinquent child-support cases were delayed.

• US Veterans: Multiple veterans' services were curtailed, ranging from health and welfare to finance and travel.

• Travel: 80,000 passport applications
  were delayed. 80,000 visas were delayed. The resulting postponement or
  cancellation of travel cost U.S. tourist industries and airlines
  millions of dollars.

• National Parks: 2 million visitors were turned away from the nation's national parks resulting in the loss of millions in revenue.

• Government-backed Loans: FHA mortgage loans worth more than $800 million to more than 10,000 low-and-moderate-income working families were delayed.

How a Government Shutdown Might Affect You

As directed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the federal
agencies now maintain contingency plans for dealing with government
shutdowns. The emphasis of those plans is to determine which functions
should continue. Most notably, the Department of Homeland Security and
its Transportation Security Administration (TSA) did not exist in 1995
when the last long-term government shutdown took place. Due to the
critical nature of their function, it is highly likely that the TSA
would continue to function normally during a government shutdown.

Based on history, here is how a long-term government shutdown might impact some government-provided public services.

• Social Security: Benefit checks would probably keep coming, but no new applications would be accepted or processed.

• Income Tax: The IRS will probably stop processing paper tax returns and refunds.

• Border Patrol: Customs and Border Patrol functions will probably continue.

• Welfare: Again, the checks would probably continue, but new applications for Food Stamps might not be processed.

• Mail: The U.S. Postal Service supports itself, so mail deliveries would continue as usual.

• National Defense: All active duty members of all branches
  of all armed services would continue duty as usual, but might not get
  paid on time. More than half of the Defense Department's 860,000+
  civilian employees would also work, the others sent home.

• Justice System: Federal courts
  should remain open. Criminals will still be chased, caught, prosecuted
  and thrown in federal prisons, which would still be operating.

• Farms/USDA: Food safety inspections will probably continue, but rural development, and farm credit and loan programs will probably close down.

• Transportation: Air traffic control, TSA security personnel, and the Coast Guard will remain on the job. Applications for passports and visas may not be processed.

• National Parks/Tourism: Parks and forests will probably
  close and visitors told to leave. Visitor and interpretive centers will
  be closed. Non-volunteer rescue and fire control services might be shut
  down. National monuments and most historic sites will probably be
  closed. Parks police will probably continue their patrols.

If you and yours in your community and state are not going to be impacted by this in some way, consider yourself lucky. What I didn't see in this list is FEMA. I don't know if the shutdown would affect their operations in Colorado. By the letter of the law, I would have to say yes. Here's the link
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/federalbu ... tdowns.htm
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[ordnance11]

werehawk wrote:

---

Obama's current political capital is pretty tenuous too say the least.

Particularly after the entire Syria issue in which Vladimir Putin gave him a not too welcome way out of the debacle he'd gotten himself into.

Nor does his doing a speech attacking Republicans at the very same time the Navy yard mass shooting was still unsettled help things...

Well, a second term president historically has less political capital to spend in the second term. Obama has even less given the fear and scorn the tail wagers in the GOP has for him. I mean look at the immigration and gun control legislation he tried to push through.
On a personal note, from where I am, the people in the state I work in  generally excoriate the federal government. Until they find out they need it's help and they demand full and instant service. Yesterday. Nevermind that service may be not forthcoming because our budget has been slashed.
__________________
Into terror!,  Into valour!
Charge ahead! No! Never turn
Yes, it's into the fire we fly
And the devil will burn!
- Scarlett Pimpernell

[Bob Schroeck]

Rajvik wrote:

---

 unlike what the democrats and the talking heads of the liberal media, (and 99.9% of the US media is liberal biased mind you) would have you believe, shutting down the government is not going to end the social security checks, its not going to end the paychecks to the military, and its not going to stop the welfare checks. all the necesary functions are going to still be there regardless of what the fear mongers are screaming.

I don't know where you're getting your information, but around here at least the "liberal media" is going to extreme pains to reassure people that social security, the military, and other key programs won't be stopped.
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.

[robkelk]

Morgan, I do not have the breakdown of the poll of those who do not want Obamacare, but a good portion of those who oppose it are liberals who do not think it goes far enough. And the I really would like to see a poll who reasons for their opposition. Medicare and Medicaid also had their opponents, but you don't see widespread opposition to them.

Not any more, no, but look at how they were attacked when they were introduced. I understand the outcry was almost as big as was the outcry about government-paid medical care in Canada when that was introduced, or the UK's NHS when that was introduced, or... well, you get the picture.

People don't like change, even if that change has statistical evidence that shows it'll keep them alive longer on average. (Get the stats from the various official government websites, and you'll see that average life expectancy in the US is lower than average life expectancy elsewhere in the industrialized world, until you get to the age bracket covered by Medicare and the average US life expectancy comes into line with everywhere else.) It's demonstrably good for them but it isn't what they've been doing all along, so it's resisted.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Black Aeronaut]

Personally, I don't see why everyone is so dead-set against the Affordable Healthcare Act. Certainly, it's going to be expensive, especially where insurance companies seek to do as government contractors have done since time immemorian: squeeze the government for every last red cent.

I can see why people would worry about that. Especially given how there was a lot of 'take the money and run' going on just a few years ago.

What I can't understand is why the GOP is doing everything in their power to sabotage the AHA by making sure that Americans don't know what it is and how it works. Many things I've heard coming out of the mouths of Republicans (with few and rare exceptions) are either outright lies or carefully selected half-truths.

I will side with others in saying that the AHA is flawed... but I am never going to side with those that demand its repeal. I say let us come to sensible terms over amendments to the law instead of taking two steps backwards just so we make plans to take one step forward.

And let's not forget: The Federal Supreme Court itself, led by no less a person than the Honorable John G. Roberts Jr. - a card-carrying member of the GOP, has made things clear on the matter - they do not see anything really wrong with the AHA aside from some wording about penalties and taxes. Which they were kind enough to fix.

[robkelk]

Back to the "sequestration" thing...

Have you folks ever considered adopting the parliamentary rules for budgets? Specifically, the one that says voting down a budget is legally equivalent to voting "no confidence" in the current government, thus dissolving the session and forcing an immediate general election?
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Bob Schroeck]

BA, part of it pure obstructionism -- there are vast swaths of the Republican Party who would rather sink the country than allow a Democratic president have any lasting positive legacy.

Part of it is a genuine and sincere difference in belief about the role and scope of government in the lives of citizens (admittedly, cranked up to 11 and wandering slightly off the scale at points, but still...).

And another part of it is tinfoil hat-level reactionaryism, fearing that once the US joins every other industrial nation in having national health care, the jackbooted thugs of the United Nations will come out of the holes they've been lurking in all these years to take away their guns and their Bibles, and impose Godless Communism(TM) and the NWO on the oppressed rich white men who are the only true backbone of America. Because a man is only free if he has a gun, a Bible, and a chance to go bankrupt if his medical bills get too large.

No particular Republican in the House embodies all three of these, but from what I can tell, a large number embrace at least two...
-- Bob
---------
Then the horns kicked in...
...and my shoes began to squeak.

[Logan Darklighter]

Doesn't anyone here remember that the sequestration was Obama's idea originally?
No? I'm not surprised. The democrats and the media have done everything they can to obfuscate that fact by simply not reporting it.

[Foxboy]

Sequestration was a bluff of the "They can't POSSIBLY be that stupid as to let it happen!" variety.

Sadly, like many, Obama found that they COULD be that stupid.
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[ECSNorway]

Factoid of the day: It is the (Democrat-controlled) Senate, not the (Republican-controlled) House of Representatives or the (Democrat-controlled) White House that has voted down every single budget bill submitted since Obama took office.

If you want to blame someone for the Sequester, now you have your culprit.
--
Sucrose Octanitrate.
Proof positive that with sufficient motivation, you can make anything explode.