Quantcast
Opinion

Will a government shutdown prove inevitable this time?

Comments

Return To Article
  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 20, 2013 5:46 p.m.

    I don't think that a government shutdown is inevitable. I don't think Republicans want to shut the government down (they are just posturing). They won't say it, but I think Democrats would like to see the government shutdown more than Republicans. Then they get to make Republicans look nuts and blame everything bad that happens in the next few years on them again.

    I do think ObamaCare is inevitable (and most Republicans know that). This is all just a show. They know we're getting ObamaCare and there's nothing they can do about it. They also know that in a decade or so we will have single-payer National Healthcare (like Obama and his handlers admitted when they didn't know they were being recorded).

    The unintended consequences that go with ObamaCare will be so bad almost everybody in America is going to BEG for single-payer system. It will just take a decade or so to get everybody miserable enough to give in.

    But IF Republicans hold their ground past the deadline... remember... government shutdowns happen frequently (during Clinton administration and several during Reagan administration), they are not a big deal.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Sept. 20, 2013 6:12 p.m.

    No big deal.

    Congress will still get paid.

    The rest of us might suffer.

    But Congress will still get paid.

    Disgusting!

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Sept. 20, 2013 6:43 p.m.

    Let's see if I understand what's going on. The Republicans are refusing to fund a bill that Obama refuses to implement. Obama is threatening to shut down the government unless the Republicans fund the bill that he refuses to implement.

    What's wrong with Obama?

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Sept. 20, 2013 9:00 p.m.

    “Unlike mainstream Republicans, who appreciate the damage a shutdown would inflict on their party, the Tea Partiers consider it a win-win,” says Scheiber about the struggle going on within the GOP.

    ======

    In other words,
    The Tea-Party is willing to sink the ship - Republican AND all of America in order to "win".

    Disgusting,
    Treasonous!

    BTW-
    Kudo's to Freeman Stevenson - who has done a superb job with the Deseret News so far!
    Keep up the good work.

    FYI Richards --
    Your rant about Obama is OFF topic.
    This article is about the House Republicans, but I know your myopic opinions can't see that.

  • radically_independent Orem, Utah
    Sept. 20, 2013 9:42 p.m.

    We have a law, that some don't like, so to prevent it from being enforced, they choose to shut down the government, rather than do the hard work of finding a replacement that makes everyone satisfied. Lets see, would that work with laws about enforcement of prostitution? Perhaps speeding laws.... just defund that State Patrol? Noise on your street, defund the DOT. Don't like that science class - pull funds from education.

    This is the level of maturity, and sophistication we now have is Washington.

    Let me ask you this.... if congress has the right to pick and choose which lawfully passed laws they want to enforce.... do we as citizens have the same right to pick and choose which laws we agree with.... and just ignore those we don't like? Seems the message they are sending is "just because we passed a law doesn't mean it needs to be enforced"... great message to us all.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    Sept. 20, 2013 9:49 p.m.

    Money bills are to originate in the House per the US Constitution... which means the House has prime responsibility to fund the government... The House has completed its work funding the government. If the Senate and the President refuse to pass and sign the House bill, the onus of shutting down the government is in their court.

    And another thing... counting up the number of Republicans and Democrats in our government who can vote... The Republicans outnumber the Democrats by 28.

    Dems Repubs
    Senate 52 46
    House 199 234
    White House 1 0
    Totals 252 280

    Difference 28

    So, if the bill has to go to conference for reconciliation, the Repubs should be in the majority.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    Sept. 20, 2013 10:06 p.m.

    @radically_independent:
    "Let me ask you this.... if congress has the right to pick and choose which lawfully passed laws they want to enforce.... do we as citizens have the same right to pick and choose which laws we agree with.... and just ignore those we don't like?"

    Let me ask you this... can the President choose which laws, passed by the US Congress, he will enforce because he don't like them? Apparently he can ignore the ones he doesn't like such as the immigration laws.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 20, 2013 10:11 p.m.

    The government will shut down. It may be shut down for a week or so, then it will be back. No lasting harm will be done, although it could cause some short term problems. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling, however, could inflict damage on the country that could last for decades.

  • TeaGuy Seattle, WA
    Sept. 20, 2013 10:30 p.m.

    Holding the US economy hostage to get what they want. When they couldn't get it through democracy.

    The GOP have officially become terrorists.

    Disgusting

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 20, 2013 10:49 p.m.

    Open Minded Mormon,
    A government shutdown doesn't "sink the ship". Stop being over-dramatic.

    It's not sinking the ship. It's more like "shutting down power to the ship". Sinking he ship is permanent (the ship is on the bottom and can't be recovered). Cutting power is temporary, you just have to restore power when you decide where you're going to get it going again (no big deal, just a little delay).

    We've had "government shutdowns" numerous times in my lifetime (1981, 1984, 1990, 1995, 1996). Google "Government Shutdowns" if you were not aware of this.

    There were several during the Reagan Administration when Democrat controlled Congress couldn't get along with the Republican President who insisted on spending cuts. There were several shutdowns during the Clinton Administration when spending was getting out of control and Congress had a showdown with the President because they had made a contract with America to turn entitlement spending around to get elected.

    Bottom line... learn your history. Government shutdowns happen frequently. It isn't the end of the world or sinking the ship. It's a way for Congress to get the President's to the table.

  • wrz Pheonix, AZ
    Sept. 21, 2013 12:38 a.m.

    @Roland Kayser:
    "The government will shut down."

    There's no need to shut down the government... for even a second.

    Even without a budget approval by the Congress to 'fund the government,' checks can continue to be written to pay the government's bills. Why, you might ask? How can the government write checks without permission of an enacted budget law appropriating funds? The answer is simple... ignore the law... the same way any other law is ignored... such as the immigration and deportation of illegal immigrants laws.

    Autocrats like Obama don't need laws to hem them in.

  • Freonpsandoz Los Angeles, CA
    Sept. 21, 2013 1:12 a.m.

    Time for the President to declare a state of emergency, use emergency powers to keep the government running, suspend Congress and order the arrest of the TP anarchists who keep throwing a wrench into the works.

  • redshirt007 tranquility base, 00
    Sept. 21, 2013 1:41 a.m.

    Well go ahead and shut it down republicans. You won't win another election for 20 years.

  • TA1 Alexandria, VA
    Sept. 21, 2013 4:07 a.m.

    Congress needs to start getting things done. You need to learn how to work with each other - if you can't - then why are we, the taxpayers - paying you - you are not doing anything for us at all.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 4:21 a.m.

    Why should this surprise anyone?

    The Republicans start wars all the time and never fund any of them either....

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Sept. 21, 2013 5:02 a.m.

    Liberal,

    I don't know which article you read, but if you read the article that the rest of us read, you certainly didn't understand it. You cided me for bringing up Obama, because you said that the article was about the Republicans. Did you even read the third and fourth paragraphs?

    Let me quote: "This year, they believe a shutdown would strengthen their hand politically, which is almost certainly true given the public outrage that would rain down on Republicans."

    Obama is playing politics. Obama is thumbing his nose at the will of the people as expressed by the People's Representatives. Obama is demanding that implemenation of his ObamaCare be postponed until after the 2014 election - and then getting exactly what he wanted, just like sequestration.

    If the fully funded government is shut down, that shutdown will be laid at the feet of the Democrats. No matter how many times the President tells us that the Republicans refused to fund government, anyone who can read can see that the Republicans fully funded government except for the ObamaCare TAX. The Court reminded us that Congress has the authority to levy on not levy a TAX.

  • KDave Moab, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 7:51 a.m.

    The media has done a good job of convincing everyone that it will be the Republicans fault if Obama shuts down the Govt.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 9:49 a.m.

    @wrz
    Conference committee doesn't treat each member equally. You'd be getting something like 3 members of each party from each of the House and Senate.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 10:53 a.m.

    Consider an even darker scenario. Big capital, e.g. the Koch brothers, wants to acquire complete control of our system. They especially despise "Obamacare" because it might give more freedom to those lacking health insurance and those threatened with losing it - i.e. people might become less afraid - a frightened employee is a good obedient employee. Moreover, big capital is willing to crash the current system, with a debt default, to gain the upper hand; they would remain after the resultant global crash because of their property. One thing I know for sure - the current crisis is being orchestrated - it is not spontaneous.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Sept. 21, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    I never take this seriously. It's all just a scripted Drama put out there by Washington in order to distract us from things like NSA spying and the Syria situation which isn't going to well for Obama.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 11:23 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah

    Liberal,

    I don't know which article you read, but if you read the article that the rest of us read, you certainly didn't understand it. You cided me for bringing up Obama, because you said that the article was about the Republicans. Did you even read the third and fourth paragraphs?

    Let me quote: "This year, they believe a shutdown would strengthen their hand politically, which is almost certainly true given the public outrage that would rain down on Republicans."

    ======

    I read it, again, and I didn't read "Obama" in there anywhere...again.
    It's your myopic fixation with him.

    The article is about the chaos within the Republican party, and mentions how the Democrats will exploit it to their advantage, period.
    Obama had nothing to do with it.

    You keeping reading "Obama" the bogggieman into every single discussion.
    It's sad really.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Sept. 21, 2013 12:09 p.m.

    Liberal,

    How silly of me to think that you thought that Obama was the President, you know, the man who sits behind the desk in the Oval Office. I totally forgot that you still wish that Bush was sitting at that desk. Let me quote a sentence from the article: "For the White House, not having to court independents as much as they did before President Obama’s second election frees them up to take more chances."

    Unless Obama is permanently on vacation, or golfing, or bowling, or out campaigning for a impossible 3rd term, he is still the man who sits behind the desk.

    The people have directed their Representatives, including Matheson, to fund all parts of the government except ObamaCare. The Democrats are talking about shutting down the government. The Republicans have no interest in hurting the aged, the infirm, the poverty stricken - but some Democrats will use those people for political fodder. They will cause hardship and hurt on those who need help the most, and then they'll lie and tell us that the Republicans did it.

    Which is worse, their lie or their deed?

  • glendenbg Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 5:14 p.m.

    @Mike Richards - Your statement "The people have directed their Representatives, including Matheson, to fund all parts of the government except ObamaCare." assumes facts not in evidence. A recent poll from The Morning Consul found that only 34% of Americans want the bill defunded.

    If your case is built on the 2012 election, the results do not support your claim. President Obama campaigned on the bill and won reelection - beating Mitt Romney b 4% points. Nationwide, Democratic congressional candidates received 51% of the votes cast, to Republicans 49%. In 2012, Republicans lost seats in the House, although they retained a majority, it was a smaller majority. Democrats retained control of the Senate against very long odds.

    Your claim that Democrats want to shut down the government is patently false. It is Republicans who are on record calling for a government shut down, including Utah's own Mike Lee. Democrats are aware they may politically benefit from a shutdown but they aren't causing it.

    If you wish to defend the shutdown, please do so, but do so based on the facts.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 6:48 p.m.

    If the GOP does shut government down, they are guaranteeing they will be out of office for a long, long time.

    Hopefully American voters will be smart enough to recognize total stupidity when they see it.

    (Even some Utah voters might be smart enough . . . . )

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 21, 2013 7:44 p.m.

    @Mike Richards
    " The Republicans have no interest in hurting the aged, the infirm, the poverty stricken "

    Yes they do, going after Obamacare directly harms the infirm and poverty stricken.

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Sept. 22, 2013 8:17 a.m.

    The far right can't win on the merits in its battle against the Affordable Care Act, so it tries an end-run by attaching an extraneous provision to a necessary bill -- the bill to fund the workings of the federal government. What should happen is simple -- the Senate should remove this extraneous provision from the funding bill, pass it and send the "clean" bill back to the House. The House, and especially its far-right members, can then determine whether is more important to work for the good of the country (and pass the bill funding the government) or play politics to appease its base (and shut down the government). If the far right gives a fig about the country and its people, it will approve the bill.

    I am waiting to see the far right appropriately deal with the Affordable Care Act. Since they don't like it they should come up with a plan that will accomplish what the ACA does -- provide universal insurance in a way they think is better. Maybe the (extremely far right) Heritage Foundation could revise the plan they originally conceived, since the ACA is originally their work.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 22, 2013 11:37 a.m.

    Denial due to pre-existing conditions.

    When the Republicans can come up with an answer that ONE condition,
    I'll give anything they say consideration.

    Otherwise - No just means no.
    No ideas, No alternatives, No plan, No suggestions, No, Nada, Zip.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Sept. 22, 2013 11:53 a.m.

    The federal government pays the salary of lots of people in Utah. The shutdown will directly hurt Utahns.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 1:12 p.m.

    Yes, WRZ, apparently the president can choose which bills he will enforce and which he will not.

    Remember all those "signing statements" from GWBush? Statements he attached to bills he didn't like just before he signed them because he knew he couldn't override a veto? In each statement, he told us right up front that he would not obey the new law.

    Have we had any "signing statements" from this president?

  • Furry1993 Ogden, UT
    Sept. 23, 2013 5:53 p.m.

    @one old man 1:12 p.m. Sept. 23, 2013

    Yes, WRZ, apparently the president can choose which bills he will enforce and which he will not.

    Remember all those "signing statements" from GWBush? Statements he attached to bills he didn't like just before he signed them because he knew he couldn't override a veto? In each statement, he told us right up front that he would not obey the new law.

    Have we had any "signing statements" from this president?

    -------------------

    Yes, our President has issued signing statements. He has issued a total of 22 during all the time he has been inn office. GWBush issued more than that in 2001. He issued a total of 109 in his first term and 50 in his second term for a total of 159. He really makes the president look like a piker, doesn't he?