I don’t understand why Lemmy is so negative about this. I see this all as a net positive for Democrats.
They managed to carve out Homeland Security funding from the rest of the appropriations discussion, and for the next two weeks it will have the Senate’s full focus. It’s critical that this discussion happen now, while the ICE/CBP tactics are on full display in Minnesota and fresh in the public’s minds. Republicans would have loved to bury it, but there must have been enough outcry from even their own constituents to force them to cave.
And, as long as the House passes it in short order and Trump signs it on Monday, Democrats would have done that while still keeping the government functioning and making payroll. Democrats fight with one hand tied behind their back in shutdown negotiations, because they think the Federal Government is worth having in the first place. Republicans would happily drown it in the bathtub, as long as they don’t get blamed for it. (And if Republicans hold it up on Monday, they will get blamed. Thats why I’m so confident this shutdown wont last past Monday.)
There is still work to do before declaring this all a win for Democrats. In particular, they need to get meaningful concessions out of these next two weeks. Schumer often snatches defeat from the jaws of victory. But they are in a much better position than if they had just refused to do anything and shut down part of the government for a long period of time again. Because then the discussions would be over all the bills that still need to pass, and not on ICE/CBP in particular.
Because, as is par for the Democrats, they haven’t gone far enough. They try to take the “enlightened centrism” approach to try to appeal to a non-existent base of voters, but a very real base of rich donors. Then what you’ll see in a couple weeks is them rolling over again and giving the GOP what they want in the “name of unity and ensuring that the people can work how they need”, all without actually gaining anything of value or making any substantiative change.
Sadly this isn’t the first time it’s happened, and it won’t be the last, and lemmings are very acutely aware of the theater and it pisses us off.
How about standing for something and sticking to it. One of our senators could filibuster, much like Strom Thurmond did for 24 hours during the civil rights movement.
Or even if you shut the government down for the ACA, you get what you were asking for rather than giving in when it “looks” like you have won the propaganda battle.
Basically they need to put inspiring acts of policy in front of rational reasoned policy, as no one think rational and reasonable is going to work with the Republican Nazis.
None of those actions actually do anything, though. All shutting the government down does is ensure government services don’t happen and government employees don’t get paid. Keep the government closed for long enough, and they all quit, and states end up taking over the functions the Federal government should have done.
That is the end goal of the current Conservative movement: to make the Federal Government so small you could drown it in the bathtub.. They would absolutely love for it to happen, but get Democrats to take the blame for it.
I see and partially agree with what you mean, but I don’t agree that those actions don’t so anything. Partially it’s having worked for change in Washington and walked away burnt out, that I know how much DC is a bubble that has cascading impacts to everyone.
In some ways yes shutting the government down means services don’t happen, but you are wrong about not getting paid. While they aren’t paid at the time, they have regularly gotten back pay after the shutdown. Some lower level may quit anyway, but often the government job is just to good at a high GS level to really give up, due to the healthcare and retirement. So it’s not easy, but it’s a paid time off.
The real impact is as you mentioned that services aren’t processed. This has a ripple impact across the world due to trade, and finance markets. This in turns puts pressure on politicians to compromise, as a slowing of the economic makes everyone upset, and that is a lever.
So it’s about finding levers that are more than show, like this current “shutdown” as many agencies have already been funded prior to this and the stopgap is likely to get passed shortly, but without longterm DHS funding. Schumer calling it a win, is just for show. DHS will continue, when they could have put their foot down and stopped everything.
Where I agree with you is that the ideal of the conservative movement is to make government small and privatize it. They can only do so much though, as the US federal government is a behemoth, and even what DOGE did–while stuipid, and short sided–barely impacted the overall long term budget. If they were really after shrinking it, they’d cut the military. DOGE claimed they cut around 55 billion, but the senate just passed a 1200 billion dollar budget. And remember the US GDP is 31 Trillion, and the 1.2 Trillion wasn’t all of the budget, just most of it.
I don’t think we need it all, but changes and improvement, especially in governments, tend to be slow and deliberate. Rash acts cause disruptions which have profound impacts, and we’ll see those.
All of which is to say yes, I agree those actions don’t seem like much, but they have more impact than you think.
Ok, then, here’s what I think: those outside actions you mention do make a difference – everywhere but in Congress. Votes count there, and when you don’t have the votes there’s not much else you can do.
In fact, I would argue that it’s precisely the actions outside of Congress that made this tiny bit of progress possible. If the people of Minnesota either rolled over to ICE or got overly violent against ICE, Democrats would t even have had the leverage to do what they did in Congress.
Stop expecting politicians (particularly those in the minority) to save us. We need to save ourselves. Making a stand outside of Congress, among the people, is much more important than yet another long speech.
/u/[email protected] is right about going farther. During the past shut down, rather than sticking to their guns for the ACA subsidies, they rolled over for the “promise of a vote” which isn’t anything at all and never really happened. The optics were greatly in their favor, but rather than keeping at it and forcing it, they rolled over at the last minute and lost any chance of helping out people on the ACA.
I don’t understand why Lemmy is so negative about this. I see this all as a net positive for Democrats.
They managed to carve out Homeland Security funding from the rest of the appropriations discussion, and for the next two weeks it will have the Senate’s full focus. It’s critical that this discussion happen now, while the ICE/CBP tactics are on full display in Minnesota and fresh in the public’s minds. Republicans would have loved to bury it, but there must have been enough outcry from even their own constituents to force them to cave.
And, as long as the House passes it in short order and Trump signs it on Monday, Democrats would have done that while still keeping the government functioning and making payroll. Democrats fight with one hand tied behind their back in shutdown negotiations, because they think the Federal Government is worth having in the first place. Republicans would happily drown it in the bathtub, as long as they don’t get blamed for it. (And if Republicans hold it up on Monday, they will get blamed. Thats why I’m so confident this shutdown wont last past Monday.)
There is still work to do before declaring this all a win for Democrats. In particular, they need to get meaningful concessions out of these next two weeks. Schumer often snatches defeat from the jaws of victory. But they are in a much better position than if they had just refused to do anything and shut down part of the government for a long period of time again. Because then the discussions would be over all the bills that still need to pass, and not on ICE/CBP in particular.
Because, as is par for the Democrats, they haven’t gone far enough. They try to take the “enlightened centrism” approach to try to appeal to a non-existent base of voters, but a very real base of rich donors. Then what you’ll see in a couple weeks is them rolling over again and giving the GOP what they want in the “name of unity and ensuring that the people can work how they need”, all without actually gaining anything of value or making any substantiative change.
Sadly this isn’t the first time it’s happened, and it won’t be the last, and lemmings are very acutely aware of the theater and it pisses us off.
But couldn’t they just decide to never pass the DHS part here? Seems to me like the smart move. Hold DHS insolvent until the midterms.
I’m curious: what would you rather see them do that goes “far enough”?
How about standing for something and sticking to it. One of our senators could filibuster, much like Strom Thurmond did for 24 hours during the civil rights movement.
Or even if you shut the government down for the ACA, you get what you were asking for rather than giving in when it “looks” like you have won the propaganda battle.
Basically they need to put inspiring acts of policy in front of rational reasoned policy, as no one think rational and reasonable is going to work with the Republican Nazis.
None of those actions actually do anything, though. All shutting the government down does is ensure government services don’t happen and government employees don’t get paid. Keep the government closed for long enough, and they all quit, and states end up taking over the functions the Federal government should have done.
That is the end goal of the current Conservative movement: to make the Federal Government so small you could drown it in the bathtub.. They would absolutely love for it to happen, but get Democrats to take the blame for it.
I see and partially agree with what you mean, but I don’t agree that those actions don’t so anything. Partially it’s having worked for change in Washington and walked away burnt out, that I know how much DC is a bubble that has cascading impacts to everyone.
In some ways yes shutting the government down means services don’t happen, but you are wrong about not getting paid. While they aren’t paid at the time, they have regularly gotten back pay after the shutdown. Some lower level may quit anyway, but often the government job is just to good at a high GS level to really give up, due to the healthcare and retirement. So it’s not easy, but it’s a paid time off.
The real impact is as you mentioned that services aren’t processed. This has a ripple impact across the world due to trade, and finance markets. This in turns puts pressure on politicians to compromise, as a slowing of the economic makes everyone upset, and that is a lever.
So it’s about finding levers that are more than show, like this current “shutdown” as many agencies have already been funded prior to this and the stopgap is likely to get passed shortly, but without longterm DHS funding. Schumer calling it a win, is just for show. DHS will continue, when they could have put their foot down and stopped everything.
Where I agree with you is that the ideal of the conservative movement is to make government small and privatize it. They can only do so much though, as the US federal government is a behemoth, and even what DOGE did–while stuipid, and short sided–barely impacted the overall long term budget. If they were really after shrinking it, they’d cut the military. DOGE claimed they cut around 55 billion, but the senate just passed a 1200 billion dollar budget. And remember the US GDP is 31 Trillion, and the 1.2 Trillion wasn’t all of the budget, just most of it.
I don’t think we need it all, but changes and improvement, especially in governments, tend to be slow and deliberate. Rash acts cause disruptions which have profound impacts, and we’ll see those.
All of which is to say yes, I agree those actions don’t seem like much, but they have more impact than you think.
Ok, then, here’s what I think: those outside actions you mention do make a difference – everywhere but in Congress. Votes count there, and when you don’t have the votes there’s not much else you can do.
In fact, I would argue that it’s precisely the actions outside of Congress that made this tiny bit of progress possible. If the people of Minnesota either rolled over to ICE or got overly violent against ICE, Democrats would t even have had the leverage to do what they did in Congress.
Stop expecting politicians (particularly those in the minority) to save us. We need to save ourselves. Making a stand outside of Congress, among the people, is much more important than yet another long speech.
/u/[email protected] is right about going farther. During the past shut down, rather than sticking to their guns for the ACA subsidies, they rolled over for the “promise of a vote” which isn’t anything at all and never really happened. The optics were greatly in their favor, but rather than keeping at it and forcing it, they rolled over at the last minute and lost any chance of helping out people on the ACA.