Another Shutdown?

[Felix]

Although the new members of Congress will not take office until January, there is a strong possibility that pressure will come from the new Republican members to refuse to raise the debt ceiling. It looks like early spring will be showdown time. If the Secretary of the Treasury cannot borrow money when the debt ceiling is reached, we would be headed to a government shutdown.

Remember December of 1995? That shutdown resulted from a refusal to pass a continuing resolution to authorize borrowing in the absence of a budget bill. The 1994 election had brought in new Republicans who thought shutting down the government was a great idea.

Incidentally, there is no budget bill yet for the fiscal year that began in October. The current continuing resolution runs out on December 3. The lame-duck session starts November 15. Should be an interesting couple of weeks.

One or both of these events will test the anti-spending, anti-deficit fervor of the Republicans.

[Police Moderator]

I know there is more to it, but I wonder if shutting the government down might be a pretty good idea?

[Justin Thyme]

Nov 4, 2010 15:34:31 GMT -5 Police Moderator said:

I know there is more to it, but I wonder if shutting the government down might be a pretty good idea?

The brief times it has happened in the past had no effect on my life.

[Warkitty]

It can directly affect my clients, which means it can affect me. Can't build stuff if you can't get zoning or permitting handled, and while that tends to be local, many local municipalities rely on Federal dollars and some of them also shut down.

[printemps]

A government shutdown would not be as catastrophic as refusing to raise the debt ceiling - which Sen.-elect Rand Paul can accomplish with a one-man filibuster. It could touch off a global financial panic.

U.S. bonds have always had zero risk of default. To introduce even a tiny doubt into the minds of ultraconservative investors cripples our ability to raise money without a risk premium

Republicans will walk the plank to vote with Democrats on this.

[Scarlet&Gray]

Just some FYI Bush raised the debt ceiling twice during his terms, first time by any US President. Just saying. Shut the mother down bring the boys home no more NASA, social security, veterans benefits,dept of ed. dept of defense just shut it down defund everything, curl up in a fetal position and enjoy life.

[rstewart]

Stop spending more than we bring in and there would be no need to raise the debt ceiling at all. In fact we might even be able to lower it.

[Scarlet&Gray]

Stop spending more than we bring in and there would be no need to raise the debt ceiling at all. In fact we might even be able to lower it.

I agree, however will never happen no matter if a (D), (R), (I) or (TEABAG) is running the country were in way too deep man!!!

[rstewart]

I'm not saying it won't be painful but spending has to be cut.

[daworm]

The thing that politicians don't get is that all of their information on how an economy should work, and how government should spend, is based on a nation that is growing. The problem is, we've ran out of room to grow, or at least we can't grow at near the pace we have in the past. The only way Social Security could ever work is if more and more people entered the work force to pay the taxes. As soon as you have a leveling off, or worse, a reduction in population, there isn't enough being paid in to match what is being paid out. Same thing happens with deficit spending, you can't keep spending the way you always have when your growth isn't the same as it has always been.

[mincerray]

A government shutdown would be a complete disaster for the GOP.

[rstewart]

How So?
We need to remember that B. Hussien Obama cannot spend 1 penny that is not appropriated by the House of Representatives. They pass the bill(s), it's up to B. Hussien Obama to sign it, veto it outright, or let it die by pocket veto. This would put the shutdown squarely on his shoulders, not the House of Representatives.

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 12:35:27 GMT -5 rstewart said:

How So?
We need to remember that B. Hussien Obama cannot spend 1 penny that is not appropriated by the House of Representatives. They pass the bill(s), it's up to B. Hussien Obama to sign it, veto it outright, or let it die by pocket veto. This would put the shutdown squarely on his shoulders, not the House of Representatives.

If the GOP House leadership does not take action to increase the debt ceiling, then the ensuing shutdown is on THEM.

[rstewart]

I'd much rather see them SLASH spending. Then there is no need to increase the debt ceiling is there?

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:02:10 GMT -5 rstewart said:

I'd much rather see them SLASH spending. Then there is no need to increase the debt ceiling is there?

Let's see if they even try that.

So what programs should they SLASH and how much will that save?

[osrb]

If the GOP House leadership does not take action to increase the debt ceiling, then the ensuing shutdown is on THEM.

Maybe that is just what we need? The federal government is way to big and needs to be trimmed. A 10-15 % reduction in non military posts and pay scales equal to private sector that would be a good start. Lets also add in that there is no automatic retirement they should have to work just as long as the private sector. The only exception for the retirement would be Military, Fire, and Police due to the nature of their jobs.

P.S. Just like private sector they must justify their jobs and pay.

[rstewart]

For starters EVERY program would get cut. This includes defense, medicare, medicaid, and yes even the golden goose, social security.

EVerything would get cut AT LEAST 10 %.

Do you ask for an increased credit limit every time you approach the max on your credit cards? I know I didn't when I carried credit cards. Why should the government be any different. Live within your means. You have to do it. I have to do it. Why is it too much to ask that OUR government does it?

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:05:50 GMT -5 osrb said:

If the GOP House leadership does not take action to increase the debt ceiling, then the ensuing shutdown is on THEM.

Maybe that is just what we need? The federal government is way to big and needs to be trimmed. A 10-15 % reduction in non military posts and pay scales equal to private sector that would be a good start. Lets also add in that there is no automatic retirement they should have to work just as long as the private sector. The only exception for the retirement would be Military, Fire, and Police due to the nature of their jobs.

P.S. Just like private sector they must justify their jobs and pay.

OK so you want to slash salaries and benefits for a relatively small subset of federal employees at places like the CIA, FBI, TSA, Department of Homelands Security, Veterans' Administration, INS, etc.

Interesting.

Tell us, then, exactly how much you think this will shave off the deficit?

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:11:20 GMT -5 rstewart said:

For starters EVERY program would get cut. This includes defense, medicare, medicaid, and yes even the golden goose, social security.

EVerything would get cut AT LEAST 10 %.

Do you ask for an increased credit limit every time you approach the max on your credit cards? I know I didn't when I carried credit cards. Why should the government be any different. Live within your means. You have to do it. I have to do it. Why is it too much to ask that OUR government does it?

I wonder which member of the new GOP majority will advocate for a 10% cut in Social Security, defense and Medicare.

Anybody got a guess who might be the courageous Tea Party member who will do so?

[el Gusano]

Propose the cuts, then let Obama veto that.

It will be on his shoulders completely then.

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:20:44 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

Propose the cuts, then let Obama veto that.

You think they actually will?

What if the GOP fails to propose massive cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Defense?

Their track record as the big spending party suggests that it's simply not gonna happen, and they aren't making any serious noise about doing it now.

We'll see, though, now won't we?

[el Gusano]

We'll also see what individual members do, or try to do, won't we?

[osrb]

OK so you want to slash salaries and benefits for a relatively small subset of federal employees at places like the CIA, FBI, TSA, Department of Homelands Security, Veterans' Administration, INS, etc.Interesting.Tell us, then, exactly how much you think this will shave off the deficit?

Federal pay ahead of private industry

It is a start. From there they need to cut all spending and eliminate earmarks. Make a law that all bills must be submitted "Clean" that is no additions for non related items. Many state governments have this already.

There is no easy fix. It will take a long time and a lot of hard work but it can be done.


I am 100% in favor of term limits too. 2 Terms senate and 3 terms congress. Then return to private sector. Many of the problems is that we now have people who have not worked in nor ever really had a private sector job and have no idea of what really goes on. The have become a special ruling class and think they above us all "little people". No more automatic pensions or life time medical just because you served 1 term or less. They should just have a 401k or similar package and like the rest of use have to pay into it and for their health insurance.

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:33:18 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

We'll also see what individual members do, or try to do, won't we?

Sure. So which GOP member do you guess will call for massive cuts in Social Security, Defense and Medicare?

[BlackFox]

Nov 9, 2010 13:37:28 GMT -5 osrb said:

I am 100% in favor of term limits too. 2 Terms senate and 3 terms congress. Then return to private sector.

They would probably be set for life by the time they "served" that much.

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:37:28 GMT -5 osrb said:

It is a start.

But how much will it actually save?

From there they need to cut all spending and eliminate earmarks. Make a law that all bills must be submitted "Clean" that is no additions for non related items. Many state governments have this already.

Seeing that the champion of this idea, Rand Paul, is already running away from his campaign promise to ban earmarks, who do you see picking the issue back up?

There is no easy fix. It will take a long time and a lot of hard work but it can be done.

Obviously. So you can't name anything except cutting the benefits of a small group of federal employees and some vague platitudes about "hard work"?

Your party is in power now. Where's the concrete ideas for controlling the government spending that you claim to hate so much?

I am 100% in favor of term limits too. 2 Terms senate and 3 terms congress. Then return to private sector. Many of the problems is that we now have people who have not worked in nor ever really had a private sector job and have no idea of what really goes on. The have become a special ruling class and think they above us all "little people". No more automatic pensions or life time medical just because you served 1 term or less. They should just have a 401k or similar package and like the rest of use have to pay into it and for their health insurance.

Which GOP Congressperson do you expect to propose legislation to this end?

[rstewart]

Nov 9, 2010 13:23:40 GMT -5 mincerray said:

Nov 9, 2010 13:20:44 GMT -5 el Gusano said:

Propose the cuts, then let Obama veto that.

You think they actually will?

What if the GOP fails to propose massive cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Defense?

Their track record as the big spending party suggests that it's simply not gonna happen, and they aren't making any serious noise about doing it now.

We'll see, though, now won't we?

Both parties have been big spenders. You make it sound as if the Democrats are more fiscally responsible than Republicans. Neither party has been particularly responsible for a long time now.

[mincerray]

Nov 9, 2010 13:44:52 GMT -5 rstewart said:

Both parties have been big spenders. You make it sound as if the Democrats are more fiscally responsible than Republicans. Neither party has been particularly responsible for a long time now.

Really? So which Republican President proposed a balanced budget like Clinton did?

[osrb]

Your party is in power now

Do not be so quick to say my party. I am NOT a Rep or a Dem. I have not voted for either party.

Your party is the one that has made the Rep spending look like nothing. Your party has spent more money than all before combined and have nothing to show for it.

[rstewart]

And just exactly where did the last balanced budget orginate? That would be the GOP lead Hosue of Representatives now wouldn't it? Clinton could only sign a budget that congress sent to him. That congress was lead by Republicans.