PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues *Warning: HuffPo* Tea Party Blamed For Shutdown


orange
04-07-2011, 02:47 PM
New Polls: Tea Party Roadblock To Budget Compromise

Mark Blumenthal
First Posted: 04/ 7/11 01:47 PM ET Updated: 04/ 7/11 02:11 PM ET

WASHINGTON -- Two new national polls confirm the political underpinnings of the ongoing budget stalemate: Most independent and Democratic voters want leaders to compromise and reach a budget deal, but the Republican's Tea Party base wants the GOP to stick to a hard-line position -- even if that could force a government shutdown.

The new polls released yesterday by Gallup and the NBC News/Wall Street Journal polling partnership support the results published by the Pew Research Center earlier this week. "The American public," as Gallup explains, "has clearly and consistently expressed a desire for elected officials in Washington to pass a new fiscal year budget without bringing government operations to a halt."

So why the stalemate? Tabulations by party provide the answer:

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2011-04-07-Blumenthal-budgetpollscompromise.png

As the table above shows, slightly better than two-thirds of Democrats want their leaders to compromise on the budget (support ranges from 68 to 69 percent) rather than force a shutdown. Similarly, the majority of independents also want lawmakers of both parties to compromise: between 53 to 76 percent support a deal. But Republicans are split, with more urging their leaders to stick to their positions (between 50 and 56 percent), rather than supporting a compromise to avert a shutdown (between 36 and 44 percent).

Two of these surveys identify Tea Party Republicans as the most resistant to compromise. Both the Pew Research and NBC/Wall Street Journal polls show exactly 68 percent of Tea Party members want the Republican leaders to stick to their positions, while both polls found only 28 percent favor compromise. On the other hand, Republicans who do not identify with the Tea Party on the Pew Research poll favor compromise by a two-to-one margin: 56 percent to 26 percent. (The third survey, from Gallup, did not report results for Tea Party identifiers.)

It is this kind of political pressure from the Republican base that, as the Wall Street Journal reports, "has prompted the Republican-led House to approve a bill calling for $61 billion in budget cuts in the current fiscal year, far more than Democratic lawmakers want."

The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll also confirms that Americans are divided and uncertain about whom they might blame if a government shutdown occurs. Roughly the same number say they would blame the Republicans in Congress (37 percent) as say they would blame either President Obama (20 percent) or the Democrats in Congress (20 percent). That result is about the same as the outcomes of three polls conducted by Pew Research and the Washington Post last month, which also asked about "blame" for a potential shutdown.

(Other polls find more Americans ready to give "responsibility" to the Republicans. More details on those polls can be found here.)

But as Nate Silver points out this morning, most Americans are not yet focused on the budget story. Bill McInturff, the Republican pollster who conducts the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll with Democrat Peter Hart, warns that the "blame" numbers may change. A government shutdown "will feel out of the blue," he tells the Journal. "This is a country that is not ready."

Americans may not be able to accurately predict their future attitudes, but pollsters can measure current perceptions of which party holds the higher ground in the budget battle.

The results from Gallup on that score are mixed. When they ask who is "doing a better job on efforts to agree on a new federal budget," they find more Americans name President Obama and Democrats in Congress (41 percent) than Republicans in Congress (34 percent).

The Republican number on that question has actually fallen eight points, from 42 percent, since mid-February, according to Gallup. Over the same period, the number for Obama and the Democrats has risen slightly, up from 39 percent.

On the other hand, two questions on yesterday's Gallup survey show that more Americans think that the budget proposals from Obama and the Democrats "do not go far enough in cutting federal spending" (45 percent) than think the GOP proposals "go too far in cutting federal spending" (32 percent).

But again, a real shutdown will raise the profile of the budget story considerably. The last government shutdown, in late 1995 and early 1996, caused the number of Americans following news about the budget debate "very closely" to nearly double (from 20 percent to 36 percent), while the number following the story "fairly" or "very closely" jumped by 19 points (from 55 percent to 74 percent) on the Pew Research tracking poll.

With that sort of increased spotlight, judgments about blame and performance are very much subject to change.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/07/tea-party-roadblock-polls_n_846122.html

KC Dan
04-07-2011, 03:12 PM
:ZZZ::ZZZ::ZZZ:

donkhater
04-07-2011, 03:17 PM
Which begs the obvious question: Why would democrats compromise if the Tea party will get the blame?

BigCatDaddy
04-07-2011, 03:19 PM
Is getting the blame supposed to = bad?

I would blame them for the shutdown for sticking to their guns and I support it.

orange
04-07-2011, 03:26 PM
But, I heard right here on CP that "Obama will own the shutdown."

http://www.picturesof.net/_images_300/hand_changing_station_on_a_car_radio_using_the_dial_royalty_free_080718-210410-927020.jpg

Hydrae
04-07-2011, 03:28 PM
Good, glad to know someone somewhere is willing to put on the big boy pants and start making the difficult decisions.

HonestChieffan
04-07-2011, 03:31 PM
But, I heard right here on CP that "Obama will own the shutdown."

http://www.picturesof.net/_images_300/hand_changing_station_on_a_car_radio_using_the_dial_royalty_free_080718-210410-927020.jpg


The tea party clearly understands that they were sent to Washington to cut spending. Saying they are the reason Obama had a shutdown on his watch should be intuitively obvious....they did what they were sent to do....the issue is Obama is going to look like a fool for not recognizing that was the message sent last November and he ignored it.

Spin away Monkeyboy.

Cave Johnson
04-07-2011, 03:42 PM
This should work out super for the Tea Party.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/fighting-for-country-gratis.html

Mark Thompson reports that a government shutdown could impact pay for the troops:

Can you imagine being a young soldier some 7,000 miles from home, and being told by a top official of the U.S. government that your next paycheck is going to be short? Even tougher to imagine is making that phone call home to the spouse to share the news. "This is going to hurt my family really bad," one wife posted on Facebook. "My husband due to deploy next week, we wont be able to pay our bills properly cause of this."

Does the Tea Party fully understand the consequences of their brinkmanship?

KC Dan
04-07-2011, 03:45 PM
Does the Tea Party fully understand the consequences of their brinkmanship?The President decides what is essential during a shutdown and if he doesn't pay the troops, it is on him. Especially after the GOP-held House just approved troop pay the rest of the fiscal with the CR today. But, you're right, it's the Tea Party's fault....fuggtard

HonestChieffan
04-07-2011, 03:47 PM
Soldiers will know they are being shat on so Obama can have abortions and the EPA can rule without oversighe.....I bet soldiers are generally smarter than OBots and will see it for what it is.

Their commander in chief is who said he will veto the bill.

Cave Johnson
04-07-2011, 03:53 PM
It's a gaffe when you tell the truth, right.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/07/pence-republican-people/

MIKE PENCE: Well, I don’t know if we’re checkmating. But we’re trying — we’re trying to score a victory for the Republican people, for — for the American — for the Republican people — trying to score a victory for the American people, not for the Republican Party. That victory is going to come in stages here.

mikey23545
04-07-2011, 03:56 PM
This should work out super for the Tea Party.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/fighting-for-country-gratis.html

Mark Thompson reports that a government shutdown could impact pay for the troops:

Can you imagine being a young soldier some 7,000 miles from home, and being told by a top official of the U.S. government that your next paycheck is going to be short? Even tougher to imagine is making that phone call home to the spouse to share the news. "This is going to hurt my family really bad," one wife posted on Facebook. "My husband due to deploy next week, we wont be able to pay our bills properly cause of this."

Does<strike> the Tea Party</strike> Obama fully understand the consequences of <strike>their</strike> his brinkmanship?

FYP.

orange
04-07-2011, 04:01 PM
It's a gaffe when you tell the truth, right.

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/07/pence-republican-people/

MIKE PENCE: Well, I don’t know if we’re checkmating. But we’re trying — we’re trying to score a victory for the Republican people, for — for the American — for the Republican people — trying to score a victory for the American people, not for the Republican Party. That victory is going to come in stages here.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_olhiYVOMcGc/SIcE60RVa2I/AAAAAAAAAJ8/wlytwRr75Fw/s400/freud.JPG

mlyonsd
04-07-2011, 04:32 PM
I guess it depends on who's doing the asking when it comes to blame:

2. If the federal government shuts down because (Republicans) and (the Obama administration) can’t agree on a budget, who do you think would be more to blame:

Republicans 37%
Obama 37%
Both 15%
Neither 2%


</PRE>http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/voters-still-split-on-blame-for-possible-shutdown/2011/04/04/AFMUiXdC_story.html

Bewbies
04-07-2011, 05:29 PM
This should work out super for the Tea Party.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/fighting-for-country-gratis.html

Mark Thompson reports that a government shutdown could impact pay for the troops:

Can you imagine being a young soldier some 7,000 miles from home, and being told by a top official of the U.S. government that your next paycheck is going to be short? Even tougher to imagine is making that phone call home to the spouse to share the news. "This is going to hurt my family really bad," one wife posted on Facebook. "My husband due to deploy next week, we wont be able to pay our bills properly cause of this."

Does the Tea Party fully understand the consequences of their brinkmanship?


Who do you really think put that into the legislation? Are you really this dumb?

chiefzilla1501
04-07-2011, 06:17 PM
This should work out super for the Tea Party.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/fighting-for-country-gratis.html

Mark Thompson reports that a government shutdown could impact pay for the troops:

Can you imagine being a young soldier some 7,000 miles from home, and being told by a top official of the U.S. government that your next paycheck is going to be short? Even tougher to imagine is making that phone call home to the spouse to share the news. "This is going to hurt my family really bad," one wife posted on Facebook. "My husband due to deploy next week, we wont be able to pay our bills properly cause of this."

Does the Tea Party fully understand the consequences of their brinkmanship?

Why is this on the Tea Party? I'm by no means a shill for their positions.

But the last time I checked, Obama and a Democratic Congress had a world of time to pass this budget. And last time I checked, when we were in a budget crunch, rather than lead a compromise Obama was too busy staging his re-election campaign.

HonestChieffan
04-07-2011, 06:27 PM
If compromise is desired, why does the press not ask Obama why his party has taken the hard line?

petegz28
04-07-2011, 08:20 PM
If compromise is desired, why does the press not ask Obama why his party has taken the hard line?

Why don't they step up and ask them WTF they didn't pass the budget when they were supposed too?

HonestChieffan
04-07-2011, 08:26 PM
Obama looked bad tonight. Stress is hard on him. But he and the children and the wookie are off on another vaca this weekend to Williamsburg to rest up.

petegz28
04-07-2011, 08:27 PM
Obama looked bad tonight. Stress is hard on him. But he and the children and the wookie are off on another vaca this weekend to Williamsburg to rest up.

He looked very bad and again lacked leadership.

trndobrd
04-07-2011, 08:39 PM
Why don't they step up and ask them WTF they didn't pass the budget when they were supposed too?

I've seen two commentators on CNN directly state that the 2011 budget could, and should have been passed by the Democratic controlled Congress last year.

prhom
04-07-2011, 09:44 PM
This should work out super for the Tea Party.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/fighting-for-country-gratis.html

Mark Thompson reports that a government shutdown could impact pay for the troops:

Can you imagine being a young soldier some 7,000 miles from home, and being told by a top official of the U.S. government that your next paycheck is going to be short? Even tougher to imagine is making that phone call home to the spouse to share the news. "This is going to hurt my family really bad," one wife posted on Facebook. "My husband due to deploy next week, we wont be able to pay our bills properly cause of this."

Does the Tea Party fully understand the consequences of their brinkmanship?

I can't believe that would happen. If so, it's like someone telling the bank they can't pay their mortgage because they have to buy a new prius (in order to save money on gas in 5 years of course).

RaiderH8r
04-08-2011, 08:36 AM
But, I heard right here on CP that "Obama will own the shutdown."

http://www.picturesof.net/_images_300/hand_changing_station_on_a_car_radio_using_the_dial_royalty_free_080718-210410-927020.jpg

Obama won't own it. He doesn't "own" anything. He'll do his usual "present" routine and make a lot of movements without doing anything and then he'll give a speech and say, "Let me be clear..." and then go on to be vague and contradictory further obfuscating the issues at hand.

If Obama and his fellow libtards had "owned" the budget like they were supposed to last year this wouldn't be going on. But no, that would require "decision making" and "leadership" qualities that if exercised might just get a fella voted out of office and BarryO isn't about to start leading now fer Chrissakes.

HonestChieffan
04-08-2011, 08:47 AM
Sounds Dems gave on the EPA issue. Now Obamas holding out on abortions....

Jaric
04-08-2011, 09:39 AM
You guys are making this way too complicated. People who lean to the right will blame the Democrats for this. People who lean to the left will blame the Republicans. People in the middle will blame whoever they are currently the most upset with.

It's that simple.

Taco John
04-08-2011, 10:05 AM
Elections have consequences. At the end of the day, this thing seems to be about the democrats desire to keep planned parenthood funded by the US taxpayer. If Obama and Co. want to make planned parenthood the issue that keeps troops from receiving pay, and shuts down government, so be it. I'd just as soon the Republicans stick to their guns.

orange
04-08-2011, 11:01 AM
EVEN REPUBLICANS START TO BALK AT A CULTURE-WAR SHUTDOWN....

Perhaps the biggest political danger for congressional Republicans isn't just shutting down the government, it's shutting down the government for a ridiculous reason that the American mainstream will find absurd.

One of the major sticking points in negotiations remains the GOP demand to cut off funding for Planned Parenthood. Talk of this being about abortion isn't quite right -- Planned Parenthood is already prohibited from using public funds to terminate pregnancies, and has been for many years. What we're talking about here is Republicans balking at access to contraception, family planning services, pap smears, and cancer screenings.

All of a sudden, a few conservative Republicans are saying this just isn't worth shutting the government down over.

Republicans should "move on" from insisting on defunding Planned Parenthood in a 2011 spending bill, a Republican senator said Friday.

With less than 24 hours to go until a shutdown, Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) suggested that a rider to defund Planned Parenthood, a key sticking point in reaching an agreement, was expendable.

"[We] just need to recognize," Toomey said on MSNBC. "We should aggressively go for everything we can get and move on."

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) -- who like Toomey, strongly opposes abortion rights -- has also urged House Republicans to drop the Planned Parenthood rider.

Last night on CNN, even Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), one of Congress' most strident opponents of abortion rights, was asked whether it makes sense to give up the culture-war riders. Remarkably, Bachmann said she supports having "a clean bill."

This isn't what House GOP leaders were hoping for at this stage in the process. Democrats spent much of yesterday arguing that Republicans would rather fight over hot-button social issues than keep the government running. These remarks from Toomey, Coburn, and Bachmann -- not a moderate in the bunch -- only help reinforce the accuracy of the Democratic message.

It's up to Speaker Boehner and his caucus to see the writing on the wall here. A great deal hangs in the balance.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_04/028850.php

LiveSteam
04-08-2011, 11:11 AM
Props to Boehner http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/signaturepics/sigpic255_2.gif

Stinger
04-08-2011, 11:19 AM
Reid says Republicans want shutdown to close clinics
11:23am EDT

WASHINGTON, April 8 (Reuters) - Ratcheting up the rhetoric, U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid on Friday said Republicans want to shut down the government because they want to deny funding to women's health clinics.

"Republicans want to shut down the government because they think there's nothing more important than keeping women from getting cancer screenings. This is indefensible and everyone should be outraged," Reid said on the Senate floor.

(Reporting by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Sandra Maler)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/08/usa-budget-health-idUSWEN079220110408

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Just curious but to Mr. Reid wouldn't the abortion called "Obamacare" cover women's health clinic visits and cancer screenings?

Jaric
04-08-2011, 11:44 AM
Reid says Republicans want shutdown to close clinics
11:23am EDT

WASHINGTON, April 8 (Reuters) - Ratcheting up the rhetoric, U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid on Friday said Republicans want to shut down the government because they want to deny funding to women's health clinics.

"Republicans want to shut down the government because they think there's nothing more important than keeping women from getting cancer screenings. This is indefensible and everyone should be outraged," Reid said on the Senate floor.(Reporting by Andy Sullivan; Editing by Sandra Maler)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/08/usa-budget-health-idUSWEN079220110408

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Just curious but to Mr. Reid wouldn't the abortion called "Obamacare" cover women's health clinic visits and cancer screenings?

Forserious Harry Reid? I'm actually impressed he managed to say that with a straight face.

Bowser
04-08-2011, 12:04 PM
They're all idiots, the entire lot of them - dems, repubs, and these tea party tards. You're welcome for that eye opening revelation.

Pestilence
04-08-2011, 12:14 PM
My wife (Air Force) just checked her paycheck....and it's half of what it normally is. She won't receive a paycheck on the 1st.

Fuck everyone in the Government.

Radar Chief
04-08-2011, 12:32 PM
Forserious Harry Reid? I'm actually impressed he managed to say that with a straight face.

Botox.

Radar Chief
04-08-2011, 12:35 PM
My wife (Air Force) just checked her paycheck....and it's half of what it normally is. She won't receive a paycheck on the 1st.

**** everyone in the Government.

Sorry to hear that bro.
Nifty how they can just choose to grandstand on your ability to pay the people you owe money.

Garcia Bronco
04-08-2011, 12:57 PM
This should work out super for the Tea Party.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/04/fighting-for-country-gratis.html

Mark Thompson reports that a government shutdown could impact pay for the troops:

Can you imagine being a young soldier some 7,000 miles from home, and being told by a top official of the U.S. government that your next paycheck is going to be short? Even tougher to imagine is making that phone call home to the spouse to share the news. "This is going to hurt my family really bad," one wife posted on Facebook. "My husband due to deploy next week, we wont be able to pay our bills properly cause of this."

Does the Tea Party fully understand the consequences of their brinkmanship?

great story; except that the troops will still be paid.

Pestilence
04-08-2011, 01:00 PM
great story; except that the troops will still be paid.

Yeah....after this is all over with. Which is awesome for people who have....you know....bills and shit to pay.

Pestilence
04-08-2011, 01:03 PM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yn_sDnFFxZw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Chief Faithful
04-08-2011, 01:12 PM
The Dems seem to take great joy blaming a faceless party that doesn't exist for the actions being taken by Congress.

FishingRod
04-08-2011, 01:21 PM
I think it is a little funny that most people think a Government shutdown is some horrible unprecedented thing. It has happed something like 15 or 16 times since the Carter Administration. It seems to me that both the Dem and Reps are taking a very small drop in the bucket of money sent or not sent to planned parenthood and using it as an excuse to point fingers at one another. Our Representatives on both sides of the isle have, and continue to prance around like bloated peacocks with very little regard doing what is best for the country.

orange
04-08-2011, 01:40 PM
The Dems seem to take great joy blaming a faceless party that doesn't exist for the actions being taken by Congress.

Members of the Tea Party Caucus


Washington, Feb 28 - Here is a list of those Members of Congress who have officially joined the Tea Party Caucus for the 112th Congress:

Sandy Adams (FL-24)
Robert Aderholt (AL-04)
Todd Akin (MO-02)
Rodney Alexander (LA-05)
Michele Bachmann (MN-06)
Roscoe Bartlett (MD-06)
Joe Barton (TX-06)
Rob Bishop (UT-01)
Gus Bilirakis (FL-09)
Diane Black (TN-06)
Paul Broun (GA-10)
Michael Burgess (TX-26)
Dan Burton (IN-05)
John Carter (TX-31)
Bill Cassidy (LA-06)
Howard Coble (NC-06)
Mike Coffman (CO-06)
Ander Crenshaw (FL-04)
John Culberson (TX-07)
Jeff Duncan (SC-03)
Blake Farenthold (TX-27)
Stephen Lee Fincher (TN-08)
John Fleming (LA-04)
Trent Franks (AZ-02)
Phil Gingrey (GA-11)
Louie Gohmert (TX-01)
Vicky Hartzler (MO-04)
Wally Herger (CA-02)
Tim Huelskamp (KS-01)
Lynn Jenkins (KS-02)
Steve King (IA-05)
Doug Lamborn (CO-05)
Jeff Landry (LA-03)
Blaine Luetkemeyer (MO-09)
Kenny Marchant (TX-24)
Tom McClintock (CA-04)
David McKinley (WV-01)
Gary Miller (CA-42)
Mick Mulvaney (SC-05)
Randy Neugebauer (TX-19)
Rich Nugent (FL-05)
Steve Pearce (NM-02)
Mike Pence (IN-06)
Ted Poe (TX-02)
Tom Price (GA-06)
Denny Rehberg (MT-At large)
David Roe (TN-01)
Dennis Ross (FL-12)
Edward Royce (CA-40)
Steve Scalise (LA-01)
Pete Sessions (TX-32)
Adrian Smith (NE-03)
Lamar Smith (TX-21)
Cliff Stearns (FL-06)
Tim Walberg (MI-07)
Joe Walsh (IL-08)
Allen West (FL-22)
Lynn Westmoreland (GA-03)
Joe Wilson (SC-02)

Updated 3/31/11

source: Rep. Michelle Bachmann (http://bachmann.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=226594)

orange
04-08-2011, 01:40 PM
I think it is a little funny that most people think a Government shutdown is some horrible unprecedented thing. It has happed something like 15 or 16 times since the Carter Administration.

Link?

FishingRod
04-08-2011, 01:49 PM
Link?

Google would work but ok

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/frequently-asked-questions-about-a-government-shutdown/2011/04/01/AF4WPIQC_story.html

orange
04-08-2011, 01:56 PM
Google would work but ok

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/frequently-asked-questions-about-a-government-shutdown/2011/04/01/AF4WPIQC_story.html

GOOGLE worked just fine, as a matter of fact. In fact, it shows why everyone is making a big deal out of it now and they didn't then.


A Brief History Of Federal Government Shutdowns
Doug Mataconis · Friday, April 8, 2011 · 3 Comments


NBC’s Pete Williams has a post today listing the government shutdowns of the past, unfortunately the list is largely unreadable thanks to two huge floating ads. So, here it is (all starting times are midnight on the date given):

■September 30 to October 11, 1976 (10 days)
■September 30 to October 13, 1977 (12 days)
■October 31 to November 9, 1977 (8 days)
■November 30 to December 9, 1977 (8 days)
■September 30 to October 18, 1978 (18 days
■September 30 to October 12, 1979 (11 days)
■November 20 to November 23, 1981 (2 days)
■September 30 to October 2, 1982 (1 day)
■December 17 to December 21, 1982 (3 days)
■November 10 to November 14, 1983 (3 days)
■September 30 to October 3, 1984 (2 days)
■October 3 to October 5, 1984 (1 day)
■October 16 to October 18, 1986 (1 day)
■December 18 to December 20, 1987 (1 day)
■October 5 to October 9, 1990 (3 days)
■November 13 to November 19, 1995 (5 days)
■December 5, 1995 to January 6, 1996 (21 days)

One of the interesting things to note is that, after 1980, the length of shutdowns was usually very short, 2 or 3 days at most. The exceptions to that are the disastrous shutdowns at the end of 1995. The main reason for that is that there was a change in the way a law called the Anti-Deficiency Act was interpreted in this situations (PDF of Congressional Research Service report):

For years, many federal agencies continued to operate during a funding gap, while “minimizing all nonessential operations and obligations, believing that Congress did not intend that agencies close down” while waiting for the enactment of annual appropriations acts or continuing resolutions.11 In 1980 and 1981, however, Attorney General Benjamin R. Civiletti issued two opinions that more strictly interpreted the Antideficiency Act in the context of a funding gap, along with its exceptions.12 The opinions stated that, with some exceptions, the head of an agency could avoid violating the Antideficiency Act only by suspending the agency’s operations until the enactment of an appropriation. In the absence of appropriations, exceptions would be allowed only when there is “some reasonable and articulable connection between the function to be
performed and the safety of human life or the protection of property.”

Basically then, before Civiletti’s opinion, government shutdowns were relatively painless affairs because large numbers of government offices continued to operate. This means there was less pressure on Congress to actually resolve the dispute. Once it became clear that shutting the government down would have real consequences, though, Congress and the White House usually had an incentive to resolve their disputes quickly. The one exception since 1980 involved two competing and contentious personalities. The lesson for 2011 from all this ? Two things, I think.

First, if there is a shutdown it’s likely to be a short one. Unlike 1995/96, there don’t seem to be the same type of personality conflicts between Boehner/Cantor and Reid/Obama that there were between Gingrich and Clinton. I don’t think Boehner really wants a shutdown, but he also has to proceed in these negotiations in a way that isn’t going to totally piss off the base. If that means that it will take a one or two day shutdown followed by a deal, then that may be what it will take.

Second, if you want to make government shutdowns less likely (although they are clearly less common now than they were in the 70′s and 80s), then the best way to do that is to make a shutdown more painful by restricting even further the government functions that could operation during a shutdown. If Congress and the White House know that they will cause real pain if they don’t resolve their disputes, then history suggests that they will make the deal rather than risking the pain and the inevitable political fallout.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/a-brief-history-of-federal-government-shutdowns/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+OTB+%28Outside+The+Beltway+%7C+OTB%29

orange
04-08-2011, 02:05 PM
The Costs of Government Shutdowns

The first of the two government shutdowns in 1995-1996 lasted only six days, from November 14 to November 20. Following the six-day shutdown, the Clinton administration released an estimate of what the six days of an idled federal government had cost.

•Lost Dollars: The six-day shutdown cost taxpayers about $800 million, including $400 million to furloughed federal employees who were paid, but did not report to work and another $400 million in lost revenue in the four days that the IRS enforcement divisions were closed.


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.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/federalbudgetprocess/a/Government-Shutdowns.htm

FishingRod
04-08-2011, 02:54 PM
Orange,

I apologize that I haven’t had the time to have an ongoing conversation today and am going to "break like the wind" in a few minutes to head to the lake. Obviously disrupting the usual manner of operation of government services causes problems but, on the flip side logic would dictate significant offsetting cost savings to the public when the Government is not operating. Utilities, Government owned vehicles and so forth. In the article you cut and pasted the following quote was a bit of an eye catcher.


“including $400 million to furloughed federal employees who were paid, but did not report to work.”

By what logic (and I know Logic and our government rarely collide in a sentence) would employees be paid that did not report to work? I can certainly see where they should be entitled to some additional bonus if they worked and their pay was delayed but, just paid not do show up makes no sense to me.

I do have a little first had experience with people not being paid who and when they expect. Once upon a time paid everyone but then discovered they forgot to take out the taxes and insurance from the direct deposits. Instead of just short paying us the next time the payroll company removed the deposits out of everyone’s accounts taking several days to be deposited correctly. That was one very ugly scene.

And a happy weekend to all

orange
04-08-2011, 02:59 PM
In the article you cut and pasted the following quote was a bit of an eye catcher.

“including $400 million to furloughed federal employees who were paid, but did not report to work.”

By what logic (and I know Logic and our government rarely collide in a sentence) would employees be paid that did not report to work?

I believe they were paid after the fact, by concensus of all parties. And it's because they didn't "not report to work." They were willing, it was the jobsite that was shut down.

Keep in mind many were on salary and would get paid for the full month. I don't think even the Republicans under Gingrich were willing to tell the hourly people that only they would have to suck it up.

RedNeckRaider
04-08-2011, 03:00 PM
If these worthless pig f&ckers from both sides wanted any creditability as far as reducing spending they would offer up some cuts of their own. A review of everything they receive as far as traveling expenses, health care benefits and salary and a list of concessions they are willing to offer up. This would by no means come close to cutting our debt but would lead people to believe they are doing more than pushing party agendas. I have become so embarrassed by our government it is hard for me to even pay attention to DC anymore. Calling them worthless pig f&ckers is an insult to anyone who may have ever f&cked a pig~