Getty Images
It's been about 16 years since the congressional Republicans forced a government shutdown, and since the last ordeal was considered a political fiasco for the GOP, policymakers have generally been eager to avoid another one.
That said, attitudes appear to be shifting. In the last Congress, Republican leaders threatened a series of shutdowns -- none of which happened, though they came close -- and as the new Congress gets underway, some GOP lawmakers appear to be rooting for another.
Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) appeared on CBS' "Face The Nation" on Sunday, voicing firm support for a suspension of government services. He cited 1995's federal stoppage, pegging that event as the "impetus" for "some real serious compromise." [...]
Host Bob Schieffer responded: "You think that's a good idea?"
Salmon did not budge, replying "Yes, I do."
"You really do?," Schieffer asked, prompting Salmon to add that he thinks "it's about time" for the shutdown to happen.
Around the same time yesterday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich boasted, "I helped close the government twice. It actually worked."
Yesterday's comments come on the heels of similar remarks from a variety of other Republican officeholders. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) argued last week that a government shutdown "may be necessary"'; Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) told MSNBC last week that the GOP needed "to be willing to tolerate" the possibility of a shutdown; and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) hopes to sell the idea that a shutdown would produce great resulst. "I think the last time we saw a shutdown, the fact that Republicans were willing to stand together -- on fiscally conservative principles -- ended up producing a result that was responsible and that benefited the country and that ultimately produced enormous economic growth," Cruz said last week.
And how, pray tell, does the GOP intend to force this result? That's unclear.
By some accounts, it appears that Republicans, including Cornyn, believe the desirable -- or at a minimum, tolerable -- shutdown is the natural result of a debt-ceiling crisis. If that is the GOP strategy, it's important to note how crazy this is.
It's true that if Congress refuses to allow the country to pay the bills for money that's already been spent, much of the government will have to be shut down. But really, that would be just one of many problems associated with a national default and a deliberate decision to trash the full faith and credit of the United States.
If Republicans think it'd be a lot of fun to shut down the government, and are looking for an opportunity to do so, the preferable move would be to force a budget fight, not a debt-limit fight. They're both dangerous moves, but the results of the latter would be far more catastrophic.
Leave a Comment:
And just in time! The Whigs and Federalists called, and they say they're getting tired of keeping the GOP's seat on the ash heap of history warm for it.
Well, since it looks like we're going to get reamed no matter what, I'm all for having the Republicans openly owning up for the reaming.
Can we make a rule that people who don't believe in government shouldn't be allowed to hold office? That would be like Karl Marx running Wal-Mart.
Only if we make a corresponding rule that people who don't believe in the free market can't make laws regulating business. Because that WOULD be Karl Marx running Walmart.
Sure, so long as you also make a rule that only those who do believe in government are under its jurisdiction. No taxation without representation, and all that. From our point of view, it's an ideal solution. All we really want is the freedom to live our own lives as we choose--as is our natural right. If you want to be ruled by a government, fine; we won't interfere. Just leave us out of it.
Free market - Spontaneous Human Combustion, happen once in a while but even free market avocates are unwilling to accept the consquences of their own creation.
Only if we make a corresponding rule that people who don't believe in the free market can't make laws regulating business. Because that WOULD be Karl Marx running Walmart.
Hey, Baxter, you dimwitted drooler, how about we have a rule that companies have to be run by people who believe in free markets? That would mean the Walton family would have to be removed from Wal-Mart.
Go back to whatever part of WingnutWhackoWorld you come from and get back to fornicating your sheep. It's obviously the one thing you're any good at, you fool.
(How come it is that wingnuts all have stupid names like Baxter?)
nybble41 - as for you, you quarter-witted dildo, you don't like what you get here being a citizen, get the hell out. Assuming there's any place on earth that would be stupid enough to take you whackjobs.
Those who do not believe in government should be deported to Somalia or Libya or the Congo. The only way to have individual liberty is to have a strong government that can protect our rights. The biggest threat to our rights are the big corporations and super rich who want to have the freedom to take everything for themselves, which means robbing the elderly and raping our public lands for their own profit.
Anybody seen the movie Shane lately or The Man who Shot Liberty Valance or The Magnificant Seven. These movies dramatize what happens when there is no government or such a weak government that the guy with the fastest gun and the most tough guys behind him can terrorize the whole community. I do not want to live where I have to own a gun to protect myself from my neighbors.
We don't have a free market as it is. The government subsidizes just about everything.
Except when it comes to a Woman's Right to Choose, Religious beliefs and a person's sexual orientation.
If you want to know what unbridled capitalism brings, just look at what's happened in Russia for the last 20 years since the Soviet Union crumbled. Oligarchic chaos. (Try saying that a few times after your 5:00 cocktail!)
No, for an extremely interesting take on this issue, read Paul Krugman's op-ed in yesterday's NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/opinion/krugman-the-big-fail.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
Oh, please! Oh, please nominate him to replace Secretary Geithner, Mr. President!
There's no such thing as a 'free market'. The shortsightedness of these ignorant republican cons negatively affects us all. The federal government is us. Free enterprise is always regulated and needs to be if it is to be protected.
Cutting spending is the worst thing for our economy. We grew our way out of every recession so far. We were in much worse shape at the end of WWII yet we spent our way out of it. Republican stupidity will destroy our economy if we don't call them out. This "we won't compromise", only belongs in a dictatorship not a democracy. This olicarchy this feudalism must be stopped before we are ruled by a corpratocracy where protests are snot allowed.
Obama and his team needs to start giving daily speeches and briefings about exactly what will happen if the government shuts down. Be specific, talk about how the executive branch will manage the lack of funds. For example, payments will be replaced by IOUs for defense contractors in red states, oil companies will get IOUs, road projects in red states will stop, farm subsidies will be suspended, and eventually social security checks will be stopped, and so on. By being specific, the Obama team can get from the abstract "shutdown" to "Holy crap! This really affects me!"
If you're trying to paint the proposed government shutdown in a negative light, you really need to pick better examples. These are all things which we can afford to do without, and should eliminate, considering our current spending problems. As a bonus, those currently drawn to lucrative government contracts will be freed for more productive private-sector work.
@nybble41:
"These are all things which we can afford to do without"
I suspect you don't live in a Red State, are not collecting Social Security, nor do you have a job in the defense industry. Or drive to your workplace on 'roads'.
As to being free to do more productive private-sector work, what would THAT be? (Remember, John Boehner told us "We're broke!")
How about we present the fact that if we trash the full faith and credit of the United Startes, no one will do business with us anymore? And not just the government, but all those private "job creators" you dildos revere so much?
You fools have no idea what you're talking about regarding the debt ceiling. But then, you have no idea what you're talking about on any topic one can think of, since you're wingnut morons.
nybbie41: I expect you do not live in a state with a National Park. Someone should ask that Congressman from Arizona how much money the Grand Canyon brings into the state of Arizona every year. I live in Colorado just down the road from Mesa Verde, and I know what shutting down that National Park will do to our local economy and Mesa Verde is not nearly as big an economic engine as the Grand Canyon. And of course both Arizona and Colorado have lots of retirees who depend on SS and veterans benefits.
Money is a medium of exchange. Mankind has used all sorts of things for money. Now a days it is a number in a computer. That number is a credit for goods and services produced and delivered. When you borrow money, you are borrowing future credits for goods and services produced. In other words debt is a form of money that can be used as a medium of exchange. If the government stops paying its debts, that takes money out of the economy.
Put all these governement employees out of work and that is a lot of money that disappears from the economy. And all those "maker" will no longer have any "takers" to buy the things made.
Would the House Reps, Senators, thier aids et. al get laid off too and not get paid? Would air traffic controllers get shut down? Would TSA get shut down? What about mass transit? Not to mention all the offices that allow private businesses to send their employees overseas to conduct private business - like passports, visas and other things. Would banks close down if the Fed. Reserve closed doors? Banks do observe all Federal holidays, so why wouldn't they honor a Federal shut-down order?
Beyond that, I am astounded that Republicans these days saw the '95 shutdown as taking a stand for their country - against an evil dictator that wanted to ensure that SS would be safe and solvent for future retirees and (gasp) raise taxes to do it! And oh yeah! There was that pay as you go proposal - something the Repubs threw out as soon as they got in office. The conclusion I have drawn since then is - don't entrust a fiscal conservative with money - They have no idea what it really means in real practice.
I think you all missed the point by both meander and nybble.
Meander seems to be wanting to remind Republican lawmakers just what all it is that the government does for the businesses that drive the economy in Republican favored states. Companies- like that of oil businesses, security contractors, etc.- are the main shakers and movers in a lot of these states and if you shut the government down that means these contractors will not be receiving their funds. And if they do not receive their funds it's going to be the constituents the Republicans care about- those with the money- who will be upset by said shut-down.
Nybble's response was that he doesn't like subsidies going to these programs. He/she was not saying that he/she doesn't like Medicare or Social Security or other programs. He was saying giving subsidies to private businesses who don't need subsidies is a waste of money and government effort (I happen to agree).
Frankly I agree with both posts and am baffled at the miscommunication.
I would like to point out that one of the effects of that shutdown was higher taxes. I guess they see a government shutdown as the only way to convince their own party to compromise.
Obama has to stand his ground on the Debt Ceiling debate...
Meaning there should NOT be any debt ceiling debate !...
America has to pay the bills that it owes, bottom line !...
And if Republicans want to shut down the government over the fact that they are trying to force Obama into CUTTING benefits for Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare while at the same time keeping "Tax Loopholes" in place for the very Rich, then they will be held responsible and suffer the consequences in 2014...
And in the end, they will AGAIN be in the same position they were in after the 2008 Elections... And that is in the Minority !....
Do Not Give Ground on the Debt Ceiling Mr. president !...
Or Republicans will keep using the same tactic every time to try and force social, and economic policy changes instead of introducing legislation in Congress..
@PPP...isn't that extortion?...blackmail....terrorism. Holding the debt ceiling hostage should not be allowed...Obama should refuse to allow it and use the 14th amendment to bypass such petty and illegal activity.
Please Mr. President, don't allow us to be consumed in blackmail by these hostage takers.
My favorite part of this rhetoric is that it is all but certain to get the Big Dog all fired up and hitting the trail to slam on these ignorant-of-history ninnies. Particularly on this topic, they are no match for a wildly popular Bill Clinton with first-hand knowledge of what really happened 16 years ago.
We can start by suspending Congressional payroll.. Immediately!
....and perks and pensions....
As I've said before . . . I think we should pay congress the federal minimum wage for only the hours they actually work and , if they don't work 40 hours per week, they don't get benefits.
Or, at the least, make them pay 3% of their health care insurance, like state employees do here in Florida.
The House will be in session for TWO DAYS this month!
"...that benefited the country and that ultimately produced enormous economic growth," Cruz said last week."
Really? If memory serves "that shut-down" resulted in Americans remembering exactly "what" services are provided by "the government" and it resulted in the GOP losing the next election cycle. So go ahead GOTP "make our day" and send that clear message to the low information sheeple - we'll see you in November 2014!
Have you heard the latest bull crap. They want to tax electric cars. Now how ridiculous is that when people should be given tax credits instead to encourage electric car usage. This is sounding like Big Oil just making it more difficult for people to want an electric car. This is the biggest scam ever. Don’t let these bought and sold republican types get away with this load of crap.
Oh go ahead...they were all over the Sunday shows saying they 'HAD to' but it 'wouldn't be that bad'. So which is it? LEVERAGE or just a tactic. Pick. If they did their JOBS maybe we wouldn't be here.
Ok the Republicans want to play silly games...let them
All Obama has to do is invoke the 14th Amendment and say "Go ahead make my day"
Something needs to be done. I respect people standing there ground but if there'sa shut down and it lasts a bit too long then Me, being a service member, Won't get paid but i still have to drive 30 miles a day to and from work so that's gas and lunch then bills and such but no income...
The Legislative Branch does not have the Constitutional power to set the debt limit lower than the amount "contracted" for in legislation signed into law with the Executive. It is a contract. They can't set any limit that would force the Executive to disobey the laws they have passed. Madison foresaw a legislative branch that would promise citizens everything to get elected and then not raise the revenues to pay for them. That is why the framers put the treasury in the Executive and why they moved the Judicial out of the Legislative branch. NO BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT HAS THE CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO SHUT DOWN ANY OTHER BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. The Executive can raise revenues using treasury bonds to meet the laws they have jointly agreed to with the Legislative. The most that Hamilton would allow for the setting of a debt limit is to restrict the Executive to not raising more money that is necessary to pay the bills. This is so they could not use wealth like kings to sway the population. Time for Obama to go to the Supreme Court and teach the Tea Party what the constitution separation of powers really means.
please tell me with straight face that our government is not bloated. If some departments would be closed, 80% of people wouldnt even notice. So if threat of some agency closings will not force Obama to seriously consider reform our financial situation and if he still demand more of my money, so he can waste it, so be it.This administration is so wasteful and incompetent financialy that something drastic is in order. Alea iacta est (latin)
Well, by all means then, tell us...
which departments would you like to shut down? Which of their employees won't notice? The IRS? State department? Pentagon?
This all assumes that you actually get to pick and choose which debts to honor or not.
What money has this administration wasted? Please tell me with a straight face exactly how this administration has been financially incompetent?
And, while I appreciate your Latin, we are hardly at the point of no return, you just don't like the people in charge.
Social security and Medicare would notice. But I really doubt you care. It''s the economy stupid. Why dont you move to Angola. You'd fit in better there.
Please tell me with a straight face that you actually have both frontal lobes and opposable thumbs, you member of the species Homo Sap.
kriswaz,
Here is a list of government agencies...how would you select which department/s could be closed that someone (like the people who work there) wouldn't notice, shut down regardless of what these agencies do or who they serve or what the human impacts would be?
Why is it too, that you still refuse to believe that your current President has spent the least of all the Presidents since, and including Reagan?
I don't claim to care what kind of false information you have to hang on to so you can continue to dislike the sitting President, but I do care that you come on here and muddy the discussion with your false information because you don't care enough to get the facts.
kriswaz: E pluribus unum (latin) for out of many one. Apparently conservative republicans have forgotten or do'nt care what that means.
kriswaz, did you miss the part where only the House of Reps can initiate spending bills? If it weren't for them, there would be no need to raise the debt ceiling. Alea iacta est, indeed.
Yes there is a lot of hot air in the government, but will this truck run if you let the air out of its tires.
The problem is that the Republicans will not cut what needs to be cut. They just want to cut SS, Medicare, and Medicaid. How many hospitals will have to close if Medicare and Medicaid go away? And if they try to do away with SS, will the government have to pay back my contributions to the trust fund, and of course such pay back would have to be adjusted for inflation.
OK I'll bite: provide any evidence of this claim
GOP needs to own all their crazy ideas and the results they create.
How can politicians get away with saying such inane vacuous statements as justification for their position on an issue? Political word salad handed to the media to "interpret", to ascribe altruistic movitations to these beltway drones, and everyone gets advance their political agenda except the American people.
The public is the net on the ping pong table between the duel paddles of Washington speak and media interpretation. The game is being played right over our heads.
First we get all of these Republicans whining that their candidate lost, and they lost seats in both chambers of Congress.
Then they stamp their feet and say that they want to secede.
Now if they don't get their way, they're going to shut down the government.
I would so love it, if they did this, then the President had the DOJ file charges against all of them that voted to shut down the government as traitors and say that they had voluntarily decided to no longer serve in government. Then we have elections to replace them all.
I'd love to let them secede, then we could declare them the failed fundamentalist terrorist-supporting state they are and NUKE THEM.
The GOP sociopathic behavior cannot be dealt with using non-directive, Rogerian responses. We don't ask, "how do you feel about that?". We simply say that behavior is unacceptable, erect a firm barrier and confine it to acceptable parameters. In other words, the President has to provide a serious and firm "gut check" to those who wish to harm the fabric of our society for ideological reasons. In addition he needs to carefully explain why Republican recalcitrance is unacceptable. Perhaps he might recruit former Pres. Clinton to help communicate this concern.
Well, they've pretty much shut down the legislature for a couple of years, except for that part about them getting paid. I'd be interested to see how much they'd be for this if they stopped getting salaries and perks for awhile.
Don't they refer to being in Congress as "public service?" They shouldn't need to be paid very much anyway.
Check your little local government, like villages and towns. It's not only Congress. They have an even less than part-time job yet get benefits and pensions. Your taxes pay for it. Why?
These clowns are at least showing their true selves and the lobby groups they are in the pockets of. First we have them pandering yo the lobbyist of the wealthy, Grover Norquist, and with Hagel's nomination coming up they will be falling all over themselves pandering to AIPAC and Israel's opposition and many want an Iran war to make money off. Then there will be another of their biggest lobbies, NRA that wants a bazooka in every home that they will pander to. At least we are clearly seeing who the Republicans are and it is an uglier and uglier sight.
the sad part is the reality that there is a sizable segment of the electorate who will not only tolerate these kinds of shenanigans, but who openly advocate them. i'm beginning to feel like a roman citizen just before the barbarians took over and things like paved roads and indoor plumbing became forgotten arts for a millenium.
Government can print more money at any time. Why not? Just keep on printing. The world still trust the USA. Why not make everybody happy? Don't just aim at the 1% or 2%. Washington politics just making this type of shows to show that they are working. Don't let them fool us. Turn on the money machine they can produce more money than the 1% or 2% or the 10%......... Let someone else in the world to work and pay for us.
The real issue with Obama negotiating on the debt ceiling will be that the same issue will come back again in 2014. The Republicans will continue to take hostages so long as he engages in negotiations. It is time to end this strategy because it is setting bad precedent. Otherwise we will continue from one hostage situation to the next as long as Republicans control the House. I would prefer the president say no more hostage situations and that he is willing to take extraordinary steps including invoking the Constitution to stop the Republicans if they refuse to pass the debt ceiling.
Spot on, as usual, Mike.
The congress appropriates all monies, so why should the president have to get the debt ceiling raised. This debt ceiling was set by congress a few years ago. When congress passes a spending bill they should have to ensure that there is a high enough debt ceiling to allow the money to be spent.
Cruz and his Texas compatriot are playing cock of the walk as if they were elected by the people instead of the big oil and gas conspiracy that they suck up to daily. They are the last vestige of a radical right wing political party that is dying on the vine. They are the democrat's most valuable tactic to turn Texas blue in 2016. Cruz is showing us how he can out gun the young guns. Texas swagger style.