Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Who really shut down the government??


Thomas Sowell: Who shut down the government?

Oct. 12, 2013 @ 07:55 PM

Even when it comes to something as basic, and apparently as simple and straightforward, as the question of who shut down the federal government, there are diametrically opposite answers, depending on whether you talk to Democrats or to Republicans.

There is really nothing complicated about the facts. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted all the money required to keep all government activities going — except for Obamacare.
This is not a matter of opinion. You can check the Congressional Record.

As for the House of Representatives’ right to grant or withhold money, that is not a matter of opinion either. You can check the Constitution of the United States. All spending bills must originate in the House of Representatives, which means that congressmen there have a right to decide whether or not they want to spend money on a particular government activity.

Whether Obamacare is good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion. But it is a matter of fact that members of the House of Representatives have a right to make spending decisions based on their opinion.
Obamacare is indeed “the law of the land,” as its supporters keep saying, and the Supreme Court has upheld its constitutionality.

But the whole point of having a division of powers within the federal government is that each branch can decide independently what it wants to do or not do, regardless of what the other branches do, when exercising the powers specifically granted to that branch by the Constitution.

The hundreds of thousands of government workers who have been laid off are not idle because the House of Representatives did not vote enough money to pay their salaries or the other expenses of their agencies — unless they are in an agency that would administer Obamacare.

Since we cannot read minds, we cannot say who — if anybody — “wants to shut down the government.” But we do know who had the option to keep the government running and chose not to. The money voted by the House of Representatives covered everything that the government does, except for Obamacare.
The Senate chose not to vote to authorize that money to be spent, because it did not include money for Obamacare. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says that he wants a “clean” bill from the House of Representatives, and some in the media keep repeating the word “clean” like a mantra. But what is unclean about not giving Harry Reid everything he wants?

If Sen. Reid and President Obama refuse to accept the money required to run the government, because it leaves out the money they want to run Obamacare, that is their right. But that is also their responsibility.
You cannot blame other people for not giving you everything you want. And it is a fraud to blame them when you refuse to use the money they did vote, even when it is ample to pay for everything else in the government.

When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.

Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.

Perhaps the biggest of the big lies is that the government will not be able to pay what it owes on the national debt, creating a danger of default. Tax money keeps coming into the Treasury during the shutdown, and it vastly exceeds the interest that has to be paid on the national debt.

Even if the debt ceiling is not lifted, that only means that government is not allowed to run up new debt. But that does not mean that it is unable to pay the interest on existing debt.

None of this is rocket science. But unless the Republicans get their side of the story out — and articulation has never been their strong suit — the lies will win. More important, the whole country will lose.

So - what say you?


by on Oct. 13, 2013 at 9:29 PM
Replies (11-20):
MsDenuninani
by Bronze Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 11:52 AM

The Republicans.

They are the only party who wanted to.

Billiejeens
by Ruby Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 12:00 PM

 

Why?

Quoting -Celestial-:

Republicans need to learn how democracy works.


 

Billiejeens
by Ruby Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 12:02 PM

 

Stunnging Ignorance.

Quoting MomTiara19:

So we dont pay our bills until the republicans get what they lost in the election?So we destroy America over it?


 

grandmab125
by Platinum Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 1:09 PM

 HSAs large enough to pay most of your medical bills will never be allowed.

When HSAs were established, there was no limit on how much you could put in and how much your employer could contribute, although some companies had limits on how much they put in them.  You also could use that money to pay for all kinds of medical related things.  A lot of people would use up this money at the end of the year, because they usually weren't carried over into the new year, by buying cold products, otc pain meds, allergy meds, etc.....anything medically related you could by in a drug store.  Now, you can only purchase RXs, pay for deductibles or otc drugs that you have a prescription for, and the items on the list on the link below.

Obamacare has now put a limit of $1,250 for a single person and $2,500 for a family on FSAs and HSAs.  Hell, that's not even enough for 1 set of braces.  Also, under Obamacare, if you spend that money on something that is not on their 'list of approved expenditures', you will be fined a tax on that money.

If you or anyone else is interested, here is a list of things now covered.  But irregardless of what it covers, those limits that are now on HSAs, FSAs, etc. just  screwed everyone, once again.

IRS Announces 2013 HSA Limits - Insurance - About.com

http://insurance.about.com/od/HealthIns/a/Irs-Sets-2013-Hsa-Contribution-Limits.htm - 25k -

 

Quoting MomofHDFandNWF:

I would agree with you - I do think that this is primarily Obama's fault.  I do not think Obamacare is the way to go - I do think that our "health system" (ie: primarily health insurae) needs a major overhauling and we need to figure out a better way.  I like the idea of Health Saving Accounts; but don't know everything there is to know about them.

I think shutting down the National Parks is completely rediculous!  It is not the National Parks that are causing the shutdown... if anything one could argue it is the people in Washington.  If anything should be shutdown in this country it should be their salaries and their state of the art fitness center.  We are "paying" everyone in Washington to do their job, their job is not getting done, so why are we still paying them?

Quoting grandmab125:

 Hi.  Welcome to this group.  Most of us in this group say that it is Obama's fault because he refuses to negotiate with the Republicans.  So, whom do you blame?


 

grandma B

erika9009
by Silver Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 1:29 PM



Quoting -Celestial-:

Republicans need to learn how democracy works.

The United States of America is NOT a democracy.

It's a democratic republic

With the big marketing engines out there, you DO NOT want a democracy in the United States.



____________________________________________________

Erika..

Children are a blessing and are never inconvenient.............

SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 3:16 PM

You mean you were not aware that laws needing funding require a funding bill that Constitutionally originates in the House of Representatives.


Quoting Clairwil:

Quoting MomofHDFandNWF:

When Barack Obama keeps claiming that it is some new outrage for those who control the money to try to change government policy by granting or withholding money, that is simply a bald-faced lie. You can check the history of other examples of “legislation by appropriation” as it used to be called.

Whether legislation by appropriation is a good idea or a bad idea is a matter of opinion. But whether it is both legal and not unprecedented is a matter of fact.

So - what say you?

I just looked up the history of “legislation by appropriation".

It is generally used to fund something minor, by adding it as a rider to an unrelated appropriations bill.

Occasionally it has been used to restrict things the president has done by using his executive powers (generally wars or other military actions, in foreign countries) - ie things which were never voted upon by congress in the first place.

I can't find a single example of when a minority party has ever used it to overturn the will of the people by reversing a main centerpiece bit of legislation, that was passed in both houses, signed by the president, ratified by the supreme court, and confirmed by the people who then re-elected the party championing it.


And that isn't what the appropriations process was designed for.   It breaks the fundamental pact of there being a loyal opposition - there being two sides who disagree, but who work together to make the country better.  

It is like a ship, where the oasrmen vote in a new captain each day.  It is ok for a minority group of oarsmen whose choice didn't get in, to grumble that they're going to Island QQQ first then Island RRR, rather than the other way around.   It isn't ok for that minority to grab axes, barricade themselves in the hold, and threaten to sink the ship unless the captain immediately sets sail directly for Island RRR.


SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 3:17 PM

You mean the Senate refused to negotiate with Congress in the funding bills.

Ergo, the Senate chose to shut down the government.

If they didn't want a shutdown, they would have negotiated, and we have been done.


Quoting MsDenuninani:

The Republicans.

They are the only party who wanted to.


SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 3:25 PM

I think you are referring to the House and Senate not allowing bipartisan conferences to amend Obamacare, and changing the rules so Republicans could not even speak about the bill on the floor. And changing the rules so that Republicans could not filibuster the law after Scott Brown was elected to the late Ted Kennedy's seat, making 41 votes against Obamacare.

And not releasing the 2,500 page bill unti 1-1/2 days before the vote - so no one had time to read it.

Are those the actions you were referring to?

Quoting Clairwil:

Quoting blondekosmic15:

preventive measures to suppress the conservative voice prior to elections in 2012

What were those?  Do you feel that this was responsible for the election being lost by the conservatives?

Were there no other factors, acting to bias things in the other direction, that evened the playing field?



MsDenuninani
by Bronze Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 4:08 PM

No, I don't, I mean what I wrote. 

If Republicans wanted to end the shutdown, they'd end the shutdown.  Why add conditions to something you ostensibly already want to do?


Quoting SallyMJ:

You mean the Senate refused to negotiate with Congress in the funding bills.

Ergo, the Senate chose to shut down the government.

If they didn't want a shutdown, they would have negotiated, and we have been done.


Quoting MsDenuninani:

The Republicans.

They are the only party who wanted to.



 

steviechick
by Member on Oct. 14, 2013 at 4:12 PM
1 mom liked this

Back in 2010 America voted for the GOP to take control of the purse strings in DC.  It's called democracy when the country votes.  They did and we see the results.  When a nation can't come together you have deadlock.  Obama is the leader of the country.  Why isn't he trying to resolve bipartisian 'bickering'?  Instead he refuses to meet with the GOP and get the Dems to come together as well.  Who is to blame for the shutdown?  I would say Obama.  If it wasn't for ObamaCare and all the uncontrolled spending going on in DC we wouldn't be where we are now.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)