General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Question for those callling the shutdown an act of sedition [View all]onenote
(42,660 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 9, 2013, 12:52 PM - Edit history (1)
I like most of your posts and consider myself a fan of your intelligent and thorough rebuttals of attacks on the administration (both from outside DU and inside DU).
But you've jumped the shark on this. I made it quite clear I don't agree with the repubs decision to insert a poison pill in the CR they sent the House and that the stalemate started with them. But this thread was about those who think that not passing a CR that the Senate and WH concur in is an act of criminal behavior by the House. Its not. Its bad policy. Its bad politics. Its bad bad bad. And the President (as I also have indicated) is right to hold the line.
And the statement that I talked about separate year long budgets because I was unaware of the House and Senate CRs. That's simply a lie on your part or maybe its just that you haven't paid attention to the several dozen posts I've made on this topic largely rebutting those who think that this stalemate constitutes a criminal act. I have repeatedly referred to the CRs in those posts, long before you decided to jump in with your misinformed (hopefully unintentionally) accusation.
To be honest, I'm still not clear what exactly you are trying to claim. The record is clear and available to anyone who cares to check:
With the end of Fiscal Year 2012 approaching in September 2012, the House and Senate approved,and the President signed, a CR that kept the government funded through March 27, 2013. In March 2013, the House and Senate each passed FY 2014 budget resolutions that were wildly different. The House proposed draconian cuts in spending while the Senate proposed a more modest combination of tax increases and spending cuts. There was never any conference to resolve the differences in the FY 2014 budget proposals. Meanwhile, the CR adopted in Sept. 2012 was about to run out and the House and Senate agreed to a new CR that extended funding for the government through September 30, 2013, the end of FY 2013. As the end of FY 2013 approached, the House and Senate still hadn't resolved their budget proposal differences or enacted any annual appropriations bills (although several appropriations bills had been passed by the House and Senate, those bills differed from one another and no conferences had been convened (largely due to House dilatory tactics) to reconcile those bills. Faced with another funding deadlin, the House proposed a short term CR that would fund the government at previous levels through December 15. That bill included the House ACA defunding proposal, despite clear warning from the Senate and the President that the ACA was off-limits. When the Senate received the House bill, they acted to strip out the House language and substitute their own CR, which maintained the funding level proposed by the House, but made two changes: it shortened the CR so that it only ran until November 15 and it also removed the ACA defunding language. This amended CR moved from the Senate back to the House, which amended it by adding an ACA delay provision and the repeal of the medical devices provision. That amended CR moved back to the Senate (it's like ping pong only each side changes the color of the ball before each return) which tabled those amendments, sending its clean short term CR back to the House again. The House, being obstinate, "receded" from its amendments, and accepted the Senate version, but only after amending it to add a different ACA delay provision. The Senate, as is its right (and as was correct as a matter of policy imo) tabled the House amendment and sent the bill back to the House which "insisted" on its language and asked for a conference. The Senate upon receiving the House language and request, voted to table them. And that's where we stand (not counting various partial shutdown lifting proposals that the House has made and the Senate, for the most part, has rejected as gimmicks).
Now, if I have any of that wrong, please advise.