Democrats finally vote to open Government

BobRyan said:

Interesting how both Republicans and Democrats now , all agree, that the Democrat senators' vote to reopen the government,a vote to end the shutdown, is what actually ENDs it, since all the republicans were ALREADY voting to open it under the clean "CR" these 14 times.

MSN

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/which-8-senate-democrats-voted-with-republicans-to-end-the-government-shutdown/ar-AA1Q7wmX?ocid=BingNewsSer

Prior to this moment of unity, the "spin" was that "we have a Republican President, Republican Congress, Republican Senate - so then it is Republicans that are keeping the government shut down no matter how many times they all vote to open the government and resume negotiations".

Air Traffic related Labor unions were not confused by the Democrat talking point rhetoric. They were all asking the Democrats to reopen the government.

I wonder how many , laid-off, out-of-funds victims of that 40 day shutdown were actually "confused" by the "it must be Republicans shutting down the government, blame them" song and dance. Only to see in the light of today that it was Republicans voting to restore funding, and avoid having people go without paychecks and until we see 8 democrats vote with them, it was simply "not enough" to budge the bolder Democrats were creating.

The more Democrats pour contempt on their fellow Democrats that voted relief for the victims of the Schumer Shutdown, the more blatantly obvious they make it that it was in fact Democrats that were victimizing Americans by the shutdown.

And why those "Eight"? Because they were immune from the threat of being primaried/bullied in the next election.

Click to expand...

The GOP controls all branches & passed a clean CR. The Dems revolted b/c of the ACA & the 2 parties go at to see who blinks first. As the days waned, then the SNAP issue came into play. Both SNAP & ACA need to be fixed. I don't know if Congress will ever fix public aid programs. 2 roads diverged in a wood & I. Two problems. First the Dems believe in socialized everything. Their goal is to get all citizens hooked on a good made by govt so that they can get elected by holding that citizen hostage over the delivery. This is a clear lesson to never be dependent on govt. The other extreme is that some of the GOP do not believe in a safety net. Fact is you do have people with issues & the other issue is lack of work. What to do. There is waste, fraud, abuse, & just poor design. All programs need a reworked formula & better quality product. The SNAP budget is $99 billion. The Pentagon just got approved for $770 billion. You would think they could transfer $5 billion over to SNAP.

BobRyan said:

In other words, today's rhetoric is basically a "Ha ha we fooled you" admission "mea culpa" for those who got snookered into believing "hey this shutdown is the fault of Republicans, it is a Republican shutdown no matter that all Republican Senators vote to open the government".

Lesson for all, try not to be so easily snookered.

Click to expand...

The shut down was just as much Republicans as Democrats. Neither would vote for the other's bill.

Yarddog said:

The shut down was just as much Republicans as Democrats. Neither would vote for the other's bill.

Click to expand...

Arguably the shutdown was more on the Republicans since they could have always ended it on their own without the Democrats.

Arcangl86 said:

Arguably the shutdown was more on the Republicans since they could have always ended it on their own without the Democrats.

Click to expand...

No the Republicans could not end the shutdown unless they went for the nuclear option in the senate. They refused to go
that route because in the future if the Democrats won the Senate, they would then seek to stack the SCOTUS with 13 members,
most who are radically left in ideology.

JimR-OCDS said:

No the Republicans could not end the shutdown unless they went for the nuclear option in the senate.

Click to expand...

So they could have done so.

JimR-OCDS said:

They refused to go
that route because in the future if the Democrats won the Senate, they would then seek to stack the SCOTUS with 13 members,
most who are radically left in ideology.

Click to expand...

It's not all or nothing. They could have amended the rule so that CRs could not be filibustered while still keeping it for most legislation. In fact they showed they knew that was a possibility by eliminating it for group confirmation votes.

Also, there has never been a serious effort to change the size of the Supreme Court, and if the Democrats ever wanted to institute a change that significant, they would simply override the filibuster themselves.

BobRyan said:

Interesting how both Republicans and Democrats now , all agree, that the Democrat senators' vote to reopen the government,a vote to end the shutdown, is what actually ENDs it, since all the republicans were ALREADY voting to open it under the clean "CR" these 14 times.

MSN

www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/which-8-senate-democrats-voted-with-republicans-to-end-the-government-shutdown/ar-AA1Q7wmX?ocid=BingNewsSer

Prior to this moment of unity, the "spin" was that "we have a Republican President, Republican Congress, Republican Senate - so then it is Republicans that are keeping the government shut down no matter how many times they all vote to open the government and resume negotiations".

Air Traffic related Labor unions were not confused by the Democrat talking point rhetoric. They were all asking the Democrats to reopen the government.

I wonder how many , laid-off, out-of-funds victims of that 40 day shutdown were actually "confused" by the "it must be Republicans shutting down the government, blame them" song and dance. Only to see in the light of today that it was Republicans voting to restore funding, and avoid having people go without paychecks and until we see 8 democrats vote with them, it was simply "not enough" to budge the bolder Democrats were creating.

The more Democrats pour contempt on their fellow Democrats that voted relief for the victims of the Schumer Shutdown, the more blatantly obvious they make it that it was in fact Democrats that were victimizing Americans by the shutdown.

And why those "Eight"? Because they were immune from the threat of being primaried/bullied in the next election.

Click to expand...

The democratic party was using peoples benefits in an attempt to "leverage" their agenda .... despicable

Arcangl86 said:

So they could have done so.

It's not all or nothing. They could have amended the rule so that CRs could not be filibustered while still keeping it for most legislation. In fact they showed they knew that was a possibility by eliminating it for group confirmation votes.

Also, there has never been a serious effort to change the size of the Supreme Court, and if the Democrats ever wanted to institute a change that significant, they would simply override the filibuster themselves.

Click to expand...

No, they could not remove nor modify the filibuster, without major consequences in the future.

All the democrats had to do is vote for the clean Continuing Resolution, which they eventually did and the government reopened.
It was the democrats who refused to vote for the CR.

When Biden was president, they talked of stacking the Supreme Court, but again, it would require 60 votes in the senate and
they knew unless they got control of both the House and the Senate, it could not be done.

jacorian said:

The GOP controls all branches & passed a clean CR. The Dems revolted b/c of the ACA & the 2 parties go at to see who blinks first. As the days waned, then the SNAP issue came into play. Both SNAP & ACA need to be fixed. I don't know if Congress will ever fix public aid programs. 2 roads diverged in a wood & I. Two problems. First the Dems believe in socialized everything. Their goal is to get all citizens hooked on a good made by govt so that they can get elected by holding that citizen hostage over the delivery. This is a clear lesson to never be dependent on govt. The other extreme is that some of the GOP do not believe in a safety net. Fact is you do have people with issues & the other issue is lack of work. What to do. There is waste, fraud, abuse, & just poor design. All programs need a reworked formula & better quality product. The SNAP budget is $99 billion. The Pentagon just got approved for $770 billion. You would think they could transfer $5 billion over to SNAP.

Click to expand...

Or the Democrats could have just voted for the CR on day one and skipped all the drama and theatrics.

JimR-OCDS said:

No, they could not remove nor modify the filibuster, without major consequences in the future.

Click to expand...

So they could have. They just didn't want to because they feared future consequences.

JimR-OCDS said:

All the democrats had to do is vote for the clean Continuing Resolution,

Click to expand...

They also needed the Republicans to support the bill. That part was likely, but not guaranteed. So of the two parties, one had the power to unilaterally pass the legislation, albeit by doing something politically risky, and the other could only require that politically risky move but not actually block the legislation. Yet you are blaming the party with no power to actually stop the bill. It's like if I shot somebody for not giving up their wallet and you blamed the victim for dying by not doing what I said.

JimR-OCDS said:

which they eventually did and the government reopened.

Click to expand...

Actually they didn't. They voted on a similar bill with several concessions. In other words, they negotiated, which is how this is supposed to work. But Republicans were so opposed to doing so at the being that the House passed the CR with a single Democratic vote, and then left town until after the funding was due to expire, ensuring only the bill they had passed could be signed into effect. Apparently there were secret discussion that happened at some point to come to a compromise, but who knows when they actually started to happen. And even those appeared to not be with Democratic le

JimR-OCDS said:

It was the democrats who refused to vote for the CR.

Click to expand...

True, because they disagreed with it. That could have been avoided by the GOP being open to negotiation at the start or having the political courage to restrict the filibuster.

JimR-OCDS said:

When Biden was president, they talked of stacking the Supreme Court

Click to expand...

Sure, there was discussion of doing so, but it wasn't supported by leadership. Biden openly opposed the idea and the one bill that was introduced was instantly sent to go die in committee in both houses. That's what I mean was not a serious effort.

JimR-OCDS said:

, but again, it would require 60 votes in the senate and
they knew unless they got control of both the House and the Senate, it could not be done.

Click to expand...

The House passes plenty of bills they know won't pass cloture in the Senate. But they pass it anyway because they think it's important or powerful political messaging, like the For the People Act, which ended up not passing because of the filibuster. That's a bit different because they didn't have the votes to pass it in the first place, but I still think it's worth bringing up. Especially since the Democrats cared enough about it and the related John Lewis Voting Rights Act to try and change the cloture rules. That attempt failed, but it's instructive because it shows how far the Democrats were willing to go for a bill that had broad party support, unlike the Judiciary Act of 2021 which never got a vote.

Arcangl86 said:

So they could have. They just didn't want to because they feared future consequences.

They also needed the Republicans to support the bill. That part was likely, but not guaranteed. So of the two parties, one had the power to unilaterally pass the legislation, albeit by doing something politically risky, and the other could only require that politically risky move but not actually block the legislation. Yet you are blaming the party with no power to actually stop the bill. It's like if I shot somebody for not giving up their wallet and you blamed the victim for dying by not doing what I said.

Actually they didn't. They voted on a similar bill with several concessions. In other words, they negotiated, which is how this is supposed to work. But Republicans were so opposed to doing so at the being that the House passed the CR with a single Democratic vote, and then left town until after the funding was due to expire, ensuring only the bill they had passed could be signed into effect. Apparently there were secret discussion that happened at some point to come to a compromise, but who knows when they actually started to happen. And even those appeared to not be with Democratic le

True, because they disagreed with it. That could have been avoided by the GOP being open to negotiation at the start or having the political courage to restrict the filibuster.

Sure, there was discussion of doing so, but it wasn't supported by leadership. Biden openly opposed the idea and the one bill that was introduced was instantly sent to go die in committee in both houses. That's what I mean was not a serious effort.

The House passes plenty of bills they know won't pass cloture in the Senate. But they pass it anyway because they think it's important or powerful political messaging, like the For the People Act, which ended up not passing because of the filibuster. That's a bit different because they didn't have the votes to pass it in the first place, but I still think it's worth bringing up. Especially since the Democrats cared enough about it and the related John Lewis Voting Rights Act to try and change the cloture rules. That attempt failed, but it's instructive because it shows how far the Democrats were willing to go for a bill that had broad party support, unlike the Judiciary Act of 2021 which never got a vote.

Click to expand...

To vote for the nuke option would've changed the senate for future issues. There was no choice but to oppose changing the filibuster.

Uhm, the Republicans in the House and Senate already voted for the CR bill. The Democrats voted no 14 times and even voted no on the
proposal bill to fund SNAP, military and federal workers pay.

JimR-OCDS said:

To vote for the nuke option would've changed the senate for future issues.

Click to expand...

True, though they could have limited the change to only apply to CRs.

JimR-OCDS said:

There was no choice but to oppose changing the filibuster.

Click to expand...

Nope, there was a choice. The other option wasn't palatable, but it was there. Whereas the Democrats working alone could not pass the bill.

JimR-OCDS said:

Uhm, the Republicans in the House and Senate already voted for the CR bill.

Click to expand...

They voted for a CR. The CR that finally passed in the Senate was a different bill because of significant amendments made to it.

JimR-OCDS said:

The Democrats voted no 14 times

Click to expand...

Well yes, because every time the vote was held on the same bill they had already rejected. After the first rejection the GOP should have offered some kind of compromise, which is how our system is designed to work.

JimR-OCDS said:

and even voted no on the
proposal bill to fund SNAP, military and federal workers pay.

Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The Democrats not only supported those things but introduced to implement them.

Arcangl86 said:

True, though they could have limited the change to only apply to CRs.

Nope, there was a choice. The other option wasn't palatable, but it was there. Whereas the Democrats working alone could not pass the bill.

They voted for a CR. The CR that finally passed in the Senate was a different bill because of significant amendments made to it.

Well yes, because every time the vote was held on the same bill they had already rejected. After the first rejection the GOP should have offered some kind of compromise, which is how our system is designed to work.

What are you talking about? The Democrats not only supported those things but introduced to implement them.

Click to expand...

They had no choice but to oppose removal of the 60 vote mandate. You obviously disagree, but I'm glad they stuck to the beliefs on this.

They voted for the CR, which essentially was the same with slight modifications made in the House.
That bill could've been approved by Schumer and the Democrats then sent back to the House as it was.
Schumer and the Senate Democrats refused which shut the government down, until some logical democrats in the Senate jumped shipped and voted for the bill.

eleos1954 said:

The democratic party was using peoples benefits in an attempt to "leverage" their agenda .... despicable

Click to expand...

Yeah, trying to keep 14 million people from losing their insurance is despicable.

BobRyan said:

In other words, today's rhetoric is basically a "Ha ha we fooled you" admission "mea culpa" for those who got snookered into believing "hey this shutdown is the fault of Republicans, it is a Republican shutdown no matter that all Republican Senators vote to open the government".

Lesson for all, try not to be so easily snookered.

Click to expand...

Republicans didn't vote to open the government. They voted for their spending bill. They voted against the Democrats bill, just as Dems voted against the Republican bill. Both were responsible for closing the government.

It reopened because a few Democrat Senators broke with the party and voted for the Republican spending bill.

JimR-OCDS said:

They had no choice but to oppose removal of the 60 vote mandate.

Click to expand...

Simple yes or no question. Regardless of potential consequences, did they have the power to modify the requirements for cloture and approve this bill with no cooperation from the Democrats?

JimR-OCDS said:

You obviously disagree, but I'm glad they stuck to the beliefs on this.

Click to expand...

You right here are admitting they had the ability to address this.

JimR-OCDS said:

They voted for the CR, which essentially was the same with slight modifications made in the House.

Click to expand...

The amendments made to the CR were made in the Senate. That means that the House will then need to pass it again.

JimR-OCDS said:

That bill could've been approved by Schumer and the Democrats then sent back to the House as it was.

Click to expand...

If they had amended the bill, it would have been sent back to the House. The House that wasn't in session because Johnson had sent them home after passing the bill precisely to pressure the Democrats to approve the bill.