America in shut down

[tampa24]

At least in these cases the party in power will obviously have a majority so will hold all the cards when it comes through pushing through changes.

Well Jon the framers set up the constitution in order to prevent exactly what you're talking about above. After breaking away from a monarchy through revolution they didn't want to create another monarchy or dictatorship in its place. They put an emphasis on de-centralizing power. They wanted checks and balances on all three branches of government. The executive, legislative and judicial...so that no one person or party could have a stranglehold on the government.

I realize that modern European countries with governments like those you describe do not have dictatorships or monarchs who are despots. But 237 years ago, preventing those very scenarios from happening was a legitimate concern for the founders of the Republic. Although if you look at fairly recent European history it did happen in Germany under the Nazi party.

 

[tampa24]

I was surprised to find out - and this is probably my age showing - that this shutdown is like the 18th since 1970. In my understanding, what's really unprecedented here is that this wasn't a disagreement over what the budget should be, but that one faction refused to perform a basic task unless the opposition caved. It doesn't seem to me to be as much a failure as it is an extremely stupid hijacking.

Well, this is not the 18th time the government has shut down that I know of. It's the second time. (Unless I'm showing my own age and ignorance of pre-20th century history. lol) It happened under Clinton. Newt Gingrich as the new Speaker of the House in 1995 misread the election results that put Republicans in charge of the Congress for the first time in decades. Voters were pissed off at the way the Democratic controlled Congress was handling things at the time and they wanted to send a strong message expressing their disapproval. There was an anti-Democrat mood at the time and the Republicans just happened to be the beneficiary of it. It didn't mean that voters who kicked the Democrats out of Congress were in love with the Republicans or their conservative philosophies.

Gingrich was not a stupid man at all. But he gave in to ego and the euphoria of the moment. As I say, he misread the election results and thought that voters had given him a mandate to impose an extremely conservative agenda on the country. He also believed that if he took the fight to Bill Clinton, that a majority of the country would support him.

He and the Republicans proposed slashing funding for Welfare, Medicaid, food stamps, Head Start, heating subsidies and a myriad of other programs designed as a safety net to help the poor. They also wanted to chip away at social/legal issues such Roe v. Wade under a "family values" platform. They called this far-right agenda and the ensuing legislation their "Contract with America".

When they sent a bill for Clinton to sign some of these things into law, Clinton balked. They figured they had Clinton by the cojones. So they decided it would be a brilliant idea for them to shut down the federal government until the voters rose up and demanded that Clinton agree to this far-right agenda. Neither of those two things happened. Voters did not rise up in support of the reactionary Contract with America, and Clinton didn't budge. A majority of the country blamed the Republicans for shutting down the government, supported Clinton, and chastised the Republican controlled Congress for overreaching so far askew of public opinion.

Will the past be prologue?

 

[joninliverton]

Well Jon the framers set up the constitution in order to prevent exactly what you're talking about above. After breaking away from a monarchy through revolution they didn't want to create another monarchy or dictatorship in its place. They put an emphasis on de-centralizing power. They wanted checks and balances on all three branches of government. The executive, legislative and judicial...so that no one person or party could have a stranglehold on the government.

I realize that modern European countries with governments like those you describe do not have dictatorships or monarchs who are despots. But 237 years ago, preventing those very scenarios from happening was a legitimate concern for the founders of the Republic. Although if you look at fairly recent European history it did happen in Germany under the Nazi party.

That is what I said earlier Tampa. 237 ago is a long time, look at the advances that have been made in the last 50 years alone. It appears that your political framework has not kept up with the times. If the tea party are responsible for this stalemate then whoever supports them should think twice about supporting them in the future however, from what i read they are as powerful as the NRA and don't get me started about them.

 

[joninliverton]

The bbc news said that there was a shut down in 1986 and again in 2008 - maybe they are wrong.

 

[tampa24]

There's a slight distinction there. There were brief instances when the parties haggled over extending the debt limit ceiling. Sometimes an agreement was not reached in time and the country was technically in danger of default on its debts. But usually in less than 48 hours or so a compromise was made to allow the government to borrow more money again and ensure continued operation. Those instances did not result in the government officially shutting down, as much as it was a matter of the government coming close to running out of money to function.

 

[tim114114]

It really comes down to whether we here in the US are willing to pay for all of this. And the very next question is how to get the cost down. I don't see much debate on question two. Jon is still cute.

 

[joninliverton]

It really comes down to whether we here in the US are willing to pay for all of this. And the very next question is how to get the cost down. I don't see much debate on question two. Jon is still cute.

Gotta feel sorry for the public workers who got no pay. Never heard of a modern day government running out of money before, I mean at least the Europeans like Greece, Spain and Italy have the Euro. Saying that check the comment below from German Chancellor Angela Merkel in late August of this year

"The German leader’s outburst came as she attempted to prove to voters she maintains a tough stance on struggling euro countries, just a month before facing key elections.“Greece shouldn’t have been allowed into the euro,” Ms Merkel told around 1,000 supporters of her Christian Democratic Union in Rendsburg on Tuesday.

“Chancellor Schroeder accepted Greece in [in 2001] and weakened the Stability Pact, and both decisions were fundamentally wrong, and one of the starting points for our current troubles.”

Ms Merkel reiterated her desire to see a strong single currency, but warned that this can only be achieved through reforms in struggling countries such as Greece.

“That [a unified euro area] is such a treasure, such a boon, that we can’t place it in doubt,” she told her supporters. “That’s why the euro is more than a currency. For this reason we’ve shown solidarity, but solidarity always linked to responsibility for reforms in those countries that experience our solidarity.”

And yes i know, the UK is NOT in the Euro, but it's austerity measures over the last 4 years have been tight and quite successful.

 

[advocate88]

Well, this is not the 18th time the government has shut down that I know of. It's the second time.

I was surprised too, but it's true! There's a good chart here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govern...ited_States#List_of_U.S._government_shutdowns

 

[joninliverton]

LOL advocate - I hope you do not rely on wikipedia for evidence in some of your cases ha ha. This is a clip from your link

"Shutdowns of the type experienced by the United States are nearly impossible in other democracies. Under the parliamentary system used in most European nations, the executive and legislative branch are not separate, with the parliament designating all executive officials, typically called "ministers". In non-parliamentary democracies, a strong executive branch typically has the authority to keep the government functioning even without an approved budget. This was the case in the United States up until 1980, when the administration of Jimmy Carter interpreted the 1884 Antideficiency Act to limit the power of federal agencies in the lack of congressional approval."

 

[advocate88]

Haha, I don't, but for what it's worth, I agree with your point (and the wikipedia aritcle's) that if we had a parliamentary system this situation couldn't happen.

 

[mikeyank]

I truly believe that discussing U.S. constitutional law and our system is irrelevant to this discussion. The reason that our government is "shut down" is simple. It is a faction of the Republican party who are sore losers. They lost out on the Affordable Health Care Law and are now holding the budget and America hostage. The health care law and the budget are two separate issues, but they are tying them together to create this situation.

I read that Jon Stewart compared the government situation to my beloved New York Football Giants who are off to an 0-4 start, as he compared Republicans to the New York Giants losing Sunday's game to the Kansas City Chiefs.

He said:

"Did you see the Giants game on Sunday?". "They lost 31-7. Do you know what the Giants didn't say after that game? 'If you don't give us 25 more points by midnight on Monday, we will shut down the f**king NFL.'"

The Republicans want President Obama to negotiate. There is nothing to negotiate. It is like bargaining with terrorists. I think that people are confused as to what the real issue is and why we are in the situation that we are in today.

 

[tampa24]

I was surprised too, but it's true! There's a good chart here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Govern...ited_States#List_of_U.S._government_shutdowns

I'll gladly eat some crow on that one Advocate. Thanks for sharing. lol

 

[mikeyank]

Obamacare vs. Affordable Healthcare

As the government is being held hostage by the tea partiers in the House of Representatives over "Obamacare", this is an interesting piece showing how so many Americans are opposed to "Obamacare", because they are told by their political leaders that it is bad, yet they have no clue what it is really all about.

 

[joninliverton]

Guess the tv programme which doesn't look like a political one, chose to choose it's targets. Do you guys have such programme like the BBC's Question Time where there is a panel of politicians and other suitable people who are chaired by the great David Dimbleby and answer questions from the audience ?

 

[joninliverton]

I truly believe that discussing U.S. constitutional law and our system is irrelevant to this discussion. The reason that our government is "shut down" is simple. It is a faction of the Republican party who are sore losers. They lost out on the Affordable Health Care Law and are now holding the budget and America hostage. The health care law and the budget are two separate issues, but they are tying them together to create this situation.

I read that Jon Stewart compared the government situation to my beloved New York Football Giants who are off to an 0-4 start, as he compared Republicans to the New York Giants losing Sunday's game to the Kansas City Chiefs.

He said:

"Did you see the Giants game on Sunday?". "They lost 31-7. Do you know what the Giants didn't say after that game? 'If you don't give us 25 more points by midnight on Monday, we will shut down the f**king NFL.'"

The Republicans want President Obama to negotiate. There is nothing to negotiate. It is like bargaining with terrorists. I think that people are confused as to what the real issue is and why we are in the situation that we are in today.

Of course it is relevant. If you didn't have such a confused and difficult political setup then none of this could possibly happen. I hear from the news today that some government workers have been told to take unpaid leave whilst this situation goes on. So what happens if a member of the worker's family goes sick or they need some sort of governmental assistance ?

 

[mikeyank]

Of course it is relevant. If you didn't have such a confused and difficult political setup then none of this could possibly happen. I hear from the news today that some government workers have been told to take unpaid leave whilst this situation goes on. So what happens if a member of the worker's family goes sick or they need some sort of governmental assistance ?

Let me try to make my point more clearly. The voting on a new budget has nothing to do with the new healthcare law. The Republican faction in the house of representatives is refusing to vote on a budget as an act of defiance against a law of our land which they opposed, but was signed into law, and so this is their "protest" as they did not get their way.

The new Affordable Health Care law has gone into effect on October 1, and the protest by the Republicans in the House cannot stop it, so they are using a childish tactic to make their point.

Yes many government workers including one of my best friends who works for the social security department has been sent home on unpaid leave, but his health insurance and other coverage has not been cancelled. It is an unpaid vacation, but he and his family are still fully covered.

 

[rrhill]

Checkout: http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/fri-september-20-2013-

 

[joninliverton]

Checkout: http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/fri-september-20-2013-

Says can only see the video in the USA ..

 

[rrhill]

It played in Amsterdam...

 

[mikeyank]

It played in Amsterdam...

Speaking of long time, "very important" forumites, to me, you too Robert have been sorely missed on the forum. It is always great to see your handsome face, and to read your thoughtful, often amusing, but always interesting posts.

back home, dear sweet wonderful Robert.