StPaulHusker Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 On 1/28/2019 at 8:05 PM, jsneb83 said: What if you don't have Democrat members of Congress? Contact your Republican member of Congress... Link to comment
Moiraine Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 1 hour ago, StPaulHusker said: Yup. Really what McConnell might want is a way to avoid a shutdown so no one will remember the GOP could just override Trump’s veto to stop it. They don’t want to do that because they might lose votes from the loony toons in their base. But if that’s how we get a law to stop the idiocy of shutdowns, good. What they could do is if they can’t pass a budget, use the one from the previous year until they can agree. I’m guessing there are dangers in that though, especially if congress is close to 50/50 for a long time. 2 Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 1 minute ago, Moiraine said: Yup. Really what McConnell might want is a way to avoid a shutdown so no one will remember the GOP could just override Trump’s veto to stop it. They don’t want to do that because they might lose votes from the loony toons in their base. But if that’s how we get a law to stop the idiocy of shutdowns, good. What they could do is if they can’t pass a budget, use the one from the previous year until they can agree. I’m guessing there are dangers in that though, especially if congress is close to 50/50 for a long time. If there is a law passed so that the President can't hold the country hostage like this, then fine, figure it out. But I'm not in favor of there being a law that prevents a shutdown all together. Then there is no incentive for them ever to work together. 1 Link to comment
Moiraine Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 4 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said: If there is a law passed so that the President can't hold the country hostage like this, then fine, figure it out. But I'm not in favor of there being a law that prevents a shutdown all together. Then there is no incentive for them ever to work together. I can imagine a scenario where a group like the Tea Party takes over, or maybe Libertarians, and they manage to keep the same old budget every year and are fine with it because it stays small. That’s one consequence I can think of. The thing is the president didn’t really have the power to do that. Congress just refused to do what they were supposed to do. They are too scared of losing their seats. 1 Link to comment
VectorVictor Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said: If there is a law passed so that the President can't hold the country hostage like this, then fine, figure it out. But I'm not in favor of there being a law that prevents a shutdown all together. Then there is no incentive for them ever to work together. That's not true. You can have people vote the people out that are cau-- *remembers that people actually voted for Trump* Okay, you're right. Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 41 minutes ago, Moiraine said: I can imagine a scenario where a group like the Tea Party takes over, or maybe Libertarians, and they manage to keep the same old budget every year and are fine with it because it stays small. That’s one consequence I can think of. The thing is the president didn’t really have the power to do that. Congress just refused to do what they were supposed to do. They are too scared of losing their seats. You're right that the president didn't have the power. I guess what I was thinking is if a law were passed that mandated the Senate to vote on a veto override if the initial vote was, say 2/3 in favor to begin with. This would take the power out of the hands of the Senate majority leader to block that vote. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 34 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said: You're right that the president didn't have the power. I guess what I was thinking is if a law were passed that mandated the Senate to vote on a veto override if the initial vote was, say 2/3 in favor to begin with. This would take the power out of the hands of the Senate majority leader to block that vote. Ya that might be a good idea. That one person can’t stop the vote like McConnell did. The thing is I have trouble trusting anything he would support. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 43 minutes ago, StPaulHusker said: You're right that the president didn't have the power. I guess what I was thinking is if a law were passed that mandated the Senate to vote on a veto override if the initial vote was, say 2/3 in favor to begin with. This would take the power out of the hands of the Senate majority leader to block that vote. Or just pass a law that says if Congress has enough votes to override a veto, then the President can't veto that bill. Then we don't have to go through the stupidity of watching members of Congress backtrack because the President disagreed. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 35 minutes ago, RedDenver said: Or just pass a law that says if Congress has enough votes to override a veto, then the President can't veto that bill. Then we don't have to go through the stupidity of watching members of Congress backtrack because the President disagreed. Isn’t what happened in December is he told them he wouldn’t sign it and then the Senate didn’t push the issue? Kind of like a nevermind. But the House vote was 217-185 so it would have been vetoed anyway. Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 3 minutes ago, Moiraine said: Isn’t what happened in December is he told them he wouldn’t sign it and then the Senate didn’t push the issue? Kind of like a nevermind. But the House vote was 217-185 so it would have been vetoed anyway. There might have been some Republicans in the House that would have changed course once they saw the Senate vote 100-0. Not holding my breath or anything. But a chance. Link to comment
sho Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 Quote Speaking to CNN on Tuesday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) floated the stunningly irresponsible possibility of throwing a debt ceiling crisis into the mix as congressional Republicans continue their effort to secure $5.7 billion worth of steel slats for Donald Trump without giving up anything in exchange. “I think the president understands we need to raise the debt ceiling,” Graham said. “It comes due in March, so why not just expedite things” by throwing it into the mid-February deadline for funding the government. In other words: Trump would be able to threaten not just a government shutdown but a default on the national debt to get his way. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/29/18202557/lindsey-graham-debt-ceiling-wall Isn't this some sort of 'domestic terrorism'? 1 Link to comment
RedDenver Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 1 hour ago, Moiraine said: Isn’t what happened in December is he told them he wouldn’t sign it and then the Senate didn’t push the issue? Kind of like a nevermind. But the House vote was 217-185 so it would have been vetoed anyway. Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the spending bill passed both the House and the Senate and then Trump vetoed it. Link to comment
Moiraine Posted January 30, 2019 Author Share Posted January 30, 2019 35 minutes ago, RedDenver said: Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the spending bill passed both the House and the Senate and then Trump vetoed it. He wouldn’t sign it. It’s possible those are the exact same thing. I’m not actually sure. Link to comment
funhusker Posted January 30, 2019 Share Posted January 30, 2019 20 minutes ago, Moiraine said: He wouldn’t sign it. It’s possible those are the exact same thing. I’m not actually sure. I'm 99.9% sure that the Senate passed the bill 100-0, and Trump threatened to not sign it because it didn't fund "the wall". This threat was based on comments from Rush and other far-right outlets who called it a bad deal. Then, Ryan said he didn't want to pass anything in the House that the President wouldn't sign. The shutdown started with a Republican Senate, Republican House, and a Republican President. That's just nuts! 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts