US Shut-Down

[DaveP]

Three questions:

1.  Why does congress have to pass a bill to pay government employees every year, when other advanced countries don't?

2. Why has no administration ever corrected this anomaly?

3. Would congressmen/women correct this anomaly once and for all, if it were their salaries they were waiting for?

DaveP

 

[ruffrecords]

I mentioned this when it was first announced but everyone seemed to think this was normal and it would not last long. The opening of soup kitchens for government employees seems to have changed that.

Cheers

Ian

 

[emrr]

We seem to operate from this perpetual mystical POV that now that the wagon trains have crossed the Rockies we might be free of the dreadful government, which leads to the idea that we constantly entertain the possibility of ending it altogether.  An ongoing scheme to pay for things would negate that.  At least some over here seem to think that way, best I can figure.  I don't get it. 

I may be wrong, but I think it has always been congressional disputes that have shut down the government, never solely a president.  Certainly not over a budget congress was willing to pass. 

 

[JohnRoberts]

Three questions:

1.  Why does congress have to pass a bill to pay government employees every year, when other advanced countries don't?

2. Why has no administration ever corrected this anomaly?

3. Would congressmen/women correct this anomaly once and for all, if it were their salaries they were waiting for?

DaveP

This is political theater and basically both political parties trying to make each other look bad. The real battle is to pin the blame on one side or the other. If both sides think they are winning this could go on even longer. This has happened before and the workers get made whole and paid for missed paychecks when the shut down ends. Of course people living paycheck to paycheck can suffer short term financial stress.

I have written about this at length before.  The annual budget is a chronic source of partisan angst and another opportunity to "resist". The heart of this recent argument is President Trumps request for $5B for southern border security ( a rounding error in the context of federal budget). This has become so amplified by TDS (Trump derangement syndrome), that opposition politicians who have historically approved such spending (this is not a new issue), now object because it happens to be one of President Trump's campaign promises, and they seem motivated to deny him any appearance of progress on such, before 2020 elections.  Laughably some of the swamp dwellers call the "wall" (fence) immoral, while these same swampers live inside gated communities with armed security, and lock their own doors.   
---
This relates to the constitutional organization of our government.  The responsibility (job) of the legislature, primarily the house of representatives is to oversee all spending/budget decisions.  This is also their primary source of power, and why lobbyists are all over them like flies on sh__.  :

The federal budget work flow is that the administration (white house) first submits a proposal for the next year's budget, then the congress negotiates and approves it, or in this case doesn't. The shut down is an extreme measure to draw public attention to the DC political shenanigans. 

For the record large parts of the budget are already approved so this is not the entire government being defunded, and critical missions are still operating, while in some cases some important functions fall through the cracks (one example is eastern Coast Guard having reduced capability to interdict drug smugglers using boats/ships to smuggle contraband into the country). 

The recent swamp behavior is reaching new heights of "idiocracy" (good movie). Nancy Pelosi has suggested that President Trump cancel his State of the Union message because of "security concerns"  :, and submit his speech in writing (denying him the huge bully pulpit to address the nation on TV). His response was to cancel a military transport that she was going to use for a 7 day "fact finding mission" to Afghanistan (including a stop to visit NATO in Brussels). This trip was scheduled well before the shut down but arguably he was doing her a favor as leaving the country during this shutdown impasse makes negotiation impossible and does not look very responsible.

We now have reality TV entertainment happening in the DC swamp. I hope this ends soon, but maybe we could just keep the non-essential federal government shut down forever.  8)

JR

 

[Gustav]

.... when other advanced countries don't?

Not sure what "advanced countries" includes, but its pretty common practice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_budget

(your location says France, so - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_France)

Its not something I have deeper knowledge of, but I am cant think of  a democratic alternative/model off the top of my head.

Gustav

 

[pucho812]

I saw this during my morning coffee.  pretty good if you ask me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkVsjDExLEc

 

[DaveP]

Not sure what "advanced countries" includes, but its pretty common practice.

What I meant was that people in other countries keep working and being paid, while budgets are voted on.  It doesn't seem fair on those individuals and it would not happen if congress members were in the same boat, I'm sure.

DaveP

 

[john12ax7]

It doesn't seem fair on those individuals and it would not happen if congress members were in the same boat, I'm sure.

If people had to abide by the same rules they impose on others,  the world would be a much better place.

 

[DaveP]

+1

DaveP

 

[JohnRoberts]

What I meant was that people in other countries keep working and being paid, while budgets are voted on.  It doesn't seem fair on those individuals and it would not happen if congress members were in the same boat, I'm sure.

DaveP

Try not to get sucked into the faux drama... these workers are the hostages caught in some internecine party politics. They will get made whole.

Governance  is messy and this is pretty low on the list of actual problems. Media is spinning as hard as they can to make this seem like an existential breakdown... this is just a hard negotiation.

If TSA workers want to call in sick, maybe fire them... President Reagan fired 11,000 flight controllers when they refused to work. 

JR 

 

[Matador]

The heart of this recent argument is President Trumps request for $5B for southern border security ( a rounding error in the context of federal budget). This has become so amplified by TDS (Trump derangement syndrome), that opposition politicians who have historically approved such spending (this is not a new issue), now object because it happens to be one of President Trump's campaign promises, and they seem motivated to deny him any appearance of progress on such, before 2020 elections.

It begs the question: why wasn't wall funding party of any of his proposed budgets over the past two years, when the GOP controlled all branches of government?  Hell, he could have lowered his tax cut by 0.0001% and paid for the wall three times over.

Perhaps it isn't 'TDS', but rather a) it doesn't have majority public support, and b) it's a dumb idea, that was perhaps state of the art 3000 years ago.

 

[JohnRoberts]

It begs the question: why wasn't wall funding party of any of his proposed budgets over the past two years, when the GOP controlled all branches of government?  Hell, he could have lowered his tax cut by 0.0001% and paid for the wall three times over.

Classic political reductio ad absurdum. The $5B budget request is just for one more year of border security upgrades, not the entire wall... Over past years billions have already been budgeted (approved by Democrats) and already spent. 

Perhaps it isn't 'TDS', but rather a) it doesn't have majority public support, and b) it's a dumb idea, that was perhaps state of the art 3000 years ago.

At the risk of stating the obvious (in a thread about politics  ), this is about messaging. What message are the under-employed, poor, families in Honduras, or Guatemala getting from media?  I see a lot of stories about cities/states promising sanctuary from ICE and free sh__ to undocumented immigrants, if they can just get here. Then we have legislators that refuse to fix the broken asylum request system that is overwhelmed allowing undocumented immigrants to be released on their own recognizance to travel freely about the nation, by promising to show up later for a hearing that few ever do.   

The media message from the last caravan, was that if enough of them travelled together they can avoid paying onerous fees to the coyotes and drug gangs that generally collect a hefty ransom to chaperone the trip. What media is not telling all the families down in central America is that last caravan was not welcomed at the border with open arms and open doors, but many of those migrants got stuck in Tijuana to wait for their asylum request hearings that are usually denied.

The bottom line is that being poor and wanting a better life does not justify an asylum status.

The "Big Beautiful Wall" is neither big or beautiful, it is a symbol... to deter people from thinking they can just sneak across the porous border. There will never be a continuous wall, or even a fence across our entire southern border,  but we need to send the message that we are serious about enforcing our laws.

I have empathy for the people of central America, and after we spank MS-13 here, we need to help their governments spank it down there, but MS-13 is effectively the government in some regions of el Salvador, Guatemala,  and Honduras, so who you gonna call? (Yes I know that MS-13 originated in Los Angeles  : )

Immigration remains unresolved because both sides get benefit from the status quo. Cheap labor benefits one side, while probable future voters and political influence excites the other side.  Why do you think there is so much push back against a citizenship question on the census form? They want to count these non-citizens for congressional districts and more (entitlement spending?).

Both parties need to man up and fix this very basic immigration policy problem. This is not remotely about $5B or a wall. Just small ball politics as usual.  Sadly we will see more of this for the next almost two years.

After 2020 who knows?  : (I don't)

JR

PS: There is another caravan forming in central America right now probably hoping the "wall" evaporates as an impediment. 

 

[midwayfair]

I can't imagine what it's like to think that the only reason people are opposed to a wall along the southern border of the U.S. is because they have "Trump Derangement Syndrome."

I just don't understand why it's seemingly so impossible to imagine that people can be opposed to an ecological and legal disaster with absolutely horrendous optics for reasons that have nothing to do with the person who's pedaling it to a minority of Americans. It doesn't matter if it would stop 100% of the illegal immigration. It's fundamentally wrong in a moral sense.*

Trump had the votes and, evidently, based on his recent election, political will to build it, and didn't make it happen in the most favorable of circumstances. (Nor did he bother making his infrastructure bill happen, if you want an example of a good campaign promise that he didn't focus on.) That observation isn't reductio ad absurdum. Are you sure you picked the right term?

*There are many instances of this in our society. I'm sure you can think of a few examples where even if something is effective that it does fundamental harm to our societal identity.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I can't imagine what it's like to think that the only reason people are opposed to a wall along the southern border of the U.S. is because they have "Trump Derangement Syndrome."

I just don't understand why it's seemingly so impossible to imagine that people can be opposed to an ecological and legal disaster with absolutely horrendous optics for reasons that have nothing to do with the person who's pedaling it to a minority of Americans. It doesn't matter if it would stop 100% of the illegal immigration. It's fundamentally wrong in a moral sense.*

Please explain what is fundamentally wrong in a moral sense about securing our southern border?

I find it easy to imagine that other people don't think like I do, the evidence of that is overwhelming.

JR

Trump had the votes and, evidently, based on his recent election, political will to build it, and didn't make it happen in the most favorable of circumstances. (Nor did he bother making his infrastructure bill happen, if you want an example of a good campaign promise that he didn't focus on.) That observation isn't reductio ad absurdum. Are you sure you picked the right term?

*There are many instances of this in our society. I'm sure you can think of a few examples where even if something is effective that it does fundamental harm to our societal identity.

 

[DaveP]

It doesn't matter if it would stop 100% of the illegal immigration. It's fundamentally wrong in a moral sense.

It could be argued that it is fundamentally wrong to have a front door on your home, there are poor people who need the shelter after all.

But for most people,keeping your family safe takes priority, do you allow just anyone to walk into your home?

In effect, you have a front door to control who enters, it is a fundamental principal the world over, that's because we have a duty of care to the members of our family.  This has nothing to do with Trump.

Amnesty International actually found that 80% of women were raped or sexually assaulted during the migration process.  I don't think there is a country in the world that doesn't control who enters its borders.

DaveP

 

[abbey road d enfer]

(your location says France, so - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_France)

The budget in question there is related to expenditures that need to be voted ; all recurrent expenditures (salaries, maintenance, operational costs...) are covered on the basis of the n-1 budget.

 

[midwayfair]

It could be argued that it is fundamentally wrong to have a front door on your home, there are poor people who need the shelter after all.

You live in Europe and grew up in England, which long ago lost most of its wilderness. The U.S. is not the same way. I'll recommend some reading:

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/68/10/740/5057517 (actual study)

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-wall-could-cause-serious-environmental-damage/

https://earth.stanford.edu/news/how-would-border-wall-affect-wildlife

These aren't clickbait articles, they're actual rigorous discussion. Perhaps they will help you will understand why building a 2000-mile physical barrier across the border with a single nation is not the same as the front door to a house. Destroying an entire ecosystem because it's easier than dealing with some people is wrong.

That's just one example of why it is. Others are philosophical, and in opposition even to our country's recent opinions of walls. Another is that it wouldn't do what it purports to do, doesn't address root causes, and wouldn't cost what it purports to (reminder: the U.S. doesn't own most of the land on the border), and I am opposed to waste.

Now that I made the profound mistake of reading and then commenting in a political thread, how do I keep it from showing up in my "recent replies"?

 

[JohnRoberts]

And I repeat myself...  This wall is a symbolic exercise to discourage undocumented immigrants from entering our country at will. There will never be a physical barrier across our entire southern border, that is not even possible, or neccesary.

We need to stop sending mixed messages to the world. We have established policy about actual deserving asylum seekers. If we want we can change that, but we shouldn't just disregard our current laws.

If you don't want your posts to show up, maybe don't make them, but all opinions are welcome here as long as offered respectfully**** (not like "I can't imagine what its like to think... xxxx" .) Arguments should stand or fall on their own merit. It is not productive to make it about any other poster personally.

We can all learn from each other and environmental impact has been discussed before. It should be possible to preserve both border security with rule of law, and not drive any species to extinction.  The "continuous wall" argument is a straw man fallacy. The "big beautiful wall" is campaign hyperbole, not a literal description. 

We do not have to ignore the little picture, to see the big picture (central America is a mess). Let's try to figure out ways to help that species (homo sapiens) in place where they are, instead of inviting cheap labor and future US voting blocks across an unsecured border ignoring current law.  The wall is a bright shiny object to distract the media and public from real issues.

JR

**** I admit I am guilty of being disrespectful toward nameless, faceless, swamp dwellers in DC for one example, or media another. But they make it so easy..  Recently a CNN analyst accused a black man of white privilege (a little self parody that should have been on SNL not CNN.)  :

 

[Gold]

A talking point seems to be Democrats voted for a wall so it’s hipocracy not to support it now. It was 25B for a border wall in exchange for a DACA fix. That was soundly rejected by Republicans.  The Democrats picked up 40 seats in the house opposing the wall. The American people voted both ways. Which is why it’s not getting done.

 

[DaveP]

You live in Europe and grew up in England, which long ago lost most of its wilderness. The U.S. is not the same way. I'll recommend some reading:

I take your environmental and ecological points, they are valid but not insurmountable.  Animal migration paths could be left open and they would leave officers free to concentrate on these areas.

The cultural make-up of central America does not seem capable of generating good crime free governance.  Should the US intervene?  I doubt it would be popular with anyone.  So what to do?  Pour money into them that gets syphoned off to corruption and drug barons?

If you can't take out the bad guys, all you can do is bolt the door I guess.  As the saying goes:-
If you keep doing the same things, you get the same result.  Got any ideas?

DaveP