Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
The President presents an offer to Congressional Democrats.
Jan 21, 2019, 11:43 AM
|
|
Y'all tell me if I'm off-base here. To me, this is backwards. Congress is the legislative body. Congress should be negotiating, coming up with a law, and voting on it. If the President wants to give his opinion, that's nice, but it's just his opinion. His job is not to come up with the laws. His job is first to sign off on it, then to execute it. Yes, he has veto power, but I think the majority party just uses that as an excuse to pass the buck on what should be their job. Force him to use the veto power if he so chooses. If I'm remembering correctly, there was a funding bill that passed the senate unanimously, or close to it. In that case, you could override his veto. Why not? Are they scared to do this?
Now, you tell me. Is this the way it normally has worked historically? Did President Obama legislate from the Oval Office like this? Bush, Clinton, Reagan?
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Part of the problem is with these campaign promises...
Jan 21, 2019, 11:50 AM
|
|
The President campaigned on building a wall. Well, he can't build a wall. Congress has to fund the building of a wall. So he shouldn't have even campaigned on that. Maybe just say "I will urge Congress to build a wall." Certainly he would have fulfilled that promise.
So, what happens is, if a wall doesn't get built, that means the President loses. That shouldn't be the case. If America needs a wall, and there is no wall, then Congress is who messed up, not the President.
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18023]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30155
Joined: 9/9/06
|
See, that's the thing...
Jan 21, 2019, 3:27 PM
|
|
"The Wall" came about because Roger Stone, Sam Nunberg, and Steve Bannon used it as a mnemonic device to keep Trump on message talking about illegal immigration. It wasn't based on any research or real policy thinking. It was never needed.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12098]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6709
Joined: 8/3/09
|
IF you can believe what I’ve read on the internet
Jan 21, 2019, 12:00 PM
|
|
the sticking point is in the senate. Allegedly, the house has voted on several shutdown ending ideas but the Honorable Senator from Kentucky will not bring anything to a vote in the senate.
I think most past presidents have pushed a legislative agenda. The new deal, civil rights act, etc. Obamacare more recently.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Is there a difference between having an agenda...
Jan 21, 2019, 12:02 PM
|
|
And being the primary negotiator for specifics of a law?
I think Mr. McConnell should do what he thinks is best for the Senate and for the American people, without regard to what the President says. He is the President's equal colleague, not his subordinate.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [119698]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 54467
Joined: 6/24/09
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
The Executive Branch requests spending...
Jan 21, 2019, 12:04 PM
|
|
so it's not entirely backwards. My understanding in this case is that Homeland Security requested $1.6B and that was placed in the bill and approved. Trump then requested more.
I don't really care if the money is approved or not, this isn't really about the money but is about the rhetoric surrounding the wall. Democrats are rejecting the inflammatory and often untrue rhetoric more than the spending.
This is politicians acting like children. But I believe I agree with you in that the Senate has ceded power to the President. They should be involved in negotiations and should be voting on legislation.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
It's all rhetoric, yes.
Jan 21, 2019, 12:18 PM
|
|
You see it in how everyone sounds like they are reading off a ######. Every single democrat is just parroting the line "can't negotiate until we re-open the government." Pardon me, but why in the world not? Who made that law? And Republicans will say something about there being a massive humanitarian crisis, which also isn't true.
The reality is that everyone is just interested in not losing this game they are playing.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
I disagree with the Democrats position.
Jan 21, 2019, 12:30 PM
|
|
They should have countered Trump's proposal. Most likely with a permanent DACA solution. If the Democrats' position is that they won't fund the wall under any circumstance and cannot agree to provide $5.6B for __________ then they will accept the blame for the shutdown.
Trump's proposal was weak and not much of a compromise, but it should be seen as a first step and should have already been countered.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Me too. I find the Democrats position on this whole thing
Jan 21, 2019, 12:35 PM
|
|
very weak. Mainly because so many of them are on record in the past supporting similar things.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
Democrat position is to deny Trump his campaign promise
Jan 21, 2019, 12:38 PM
[ in reply to I disagree with the Democrats position. ] |
|
so $1 to fund a border wall is a win for Trump. There is no negotiation from the Dem side.
Since the shutdown has spanned 30+ days, Trump should begin Firing Bureaucrats by the thousands.
Lets get this moving.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
Sure, no different than Republicans under Obama.
Jan 21, 2019, 12:56 PM
|
|
Although they were able to resolve their shutdown earlier.
My understanding is that the $5.6B was never formally requested. So the $1.6B that has been approved is approving the request. Not sure how true that is or if that is semantics between a continuing resolution and a full appropriations bill.
Trump's campaign promise was also that Mexico would pay for the wall.
But I agree that the Democrats should be negotiating. Honestly Trump never should have gone back on the agreement a year ago where $25B was agreed upon for his wall in exchange for permanent DACA. The Democrats should have already proposed that.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14048
Joined: 9/2/03
|
Trump owns the shutdown, he said he was proud to do it.
Jan 21, 2019, 1:01 PM
[ in reply to It's all rhetoric, yes. ] |
|
In reality it's not so much a shutdown as a hostage situation. You gimme 5.7 bil, I'll let fed workers get back on the job. It's like he's trying to negotiate his way out of a liquor store robbery gone bad and if he doesn't get what he wants the clerk is getting a bullet to the head. Clinton did the same thing and ended up making Newt's career. The only negotiation that needs to happen right now is LET THE HOSTAGES GO. Make concessions to hostage takers and they'll keep doing it.
Once that happens, get down to business and get fencing up where it's needed, sure, but beef up security at ports...where MOST of the drugs are coming in. Sensors, drones, more boots along the border. And if you really want to curb illegal immigration, create a way track down the mofuggers that overstay their legal visas...because thats how most of it happens.
Everybody wants border security and anybody that says otherwise is a fool. Trumps wall is nothing but a useless symbol to appease his ignorant Luddite followers. And 5.7 bil, that ain't the cost of it...thats just the down payment. So spend money on border security wisely, invest in less costly, long term, more effective security measures.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
He did say that, and he was lying when he did. For me,
Jan 21, 2019, 1:05 PM
|
|
it's hard for me to say that the President is to blame for a shutdown, when the President does not have the power to open the government or close the government. Congress funds the government. If the government is shut down because of the President's demands, it's only because Congress is acquiescing to them. They have the power to change this.
I don't think any one party is to blame for the shutdown, but this is the job of Congress. If they pass a law, and the President vetos it, THEN he would own the shutdown, to me.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14048
Joined: 9/2/03
|
See, this is where our buddy McConnell comes in. He ain't
Jan 21, 2019, 1:14 PM
|
|
letting anything get voted on that would possibly place Republicans in a bad light. Those bills from the House he didn't let on the floor would've put the mess at Trump's feet. And as much as McConnell despises Trump as a person, he a useful and controllable goon to him, and McConnell can be the puppet master to try and save the GOP from embarrassment and ridicule.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
That's kinda what I'm saying...if you can pin the shutdown
Jan 21, 2019, 1:21 PM
|
|
on any one person more than another, maybe it's Mr. McConnell, who is in charge of allowing a floor vote to try to end the shutdown.
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12851]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15971
Joined: 10/25/02
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I have read that they have voted on multiple spending
Jan 21, 2019, 12:29 PM
|
|
bills, and that the Senate has not yet chosen to vote on any of them.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
The Senate won't bring anything to the floor that Trump does
Jan 21, 2019, 12:34 PM
[ in reply to how has Senate Ceded power. All Appropriations must ] |
|
not approve beforehand. They are not negotiating. They are a separate branch of government and are made up of different constituents that they represent.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97716]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64856
Joined: 7/13/02
|
All valid Constitutional points. Only one problem....
Jan 21, 2019, 12:06 PM
|
|
We're so far beyond following the Constitution, it really is a moot point. Trump is leveraging our national debt crisis to get legislation passed that he wants. No wall, no funding, government shuts down because we're broke unless Congress votes to print money and increase the debt.
Without a $22 trillion national debt, Trump would not be in a position to legislate from the White House. Here's a fact that can very well play out that makes this whole thing pretty transparent. Democrats want open borders. PERIOD. It's that simple. A government shutdown is not a big deal, until it becomes one. It's becoming one as we speak. When it becomes a big deal, there's a VERY high probability that our sovereign credit rating will be impacted. It already has to an extent. When that happens, we will be forced to pay MORE in interest on our national debt, costing us far more in debt service payments than a titanium wall would cost. A ONE point increase in the federal lending rate equaled $100 billion + in additional costs in debt servicing. Drag this shutdown out longer, and we could easily see a further downgrade in our rating, and another tick up in interest we pay. That "tick" will equal FAR more than whatever Trump is asking for for a wall. The stakes here are SO FAR past $5 billion, it's clear the democrats just want open borders. Period. And so do pubs really.
And yes, Obama, Clinton, AND Bush legislated from the oval office. Immigration is the best example of that by the way. We have immigration laws. They have not been enforced for DECADES. Congress refuses to enact immigration reform, and that crosses party lines. The fact it does, and there's no party supporting immigration reform, speaks volumes. But for decades Presidents, from BOTH parties, have been ignoring the immigration laws on the books by refusing to enforce them. Why not the IRS? What if the President doesn't like a tax law, and decides to instruct the IRS not to collect that tax? That's what they've done with immigration.
Until we can have a balanced budget, and our debt starts to shrink, we're on a path to default. This is just another step. Enjoy the ride.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Isn't it true, anyway, that $5.7 billion is not anything
Jan 21, 2019, 12:44 PM
|
|
close to what would be required to build a significant portion of this "wall"? If that's true, then it's obvious that this fight they are having is not about the literal presence of a wall. Because that's not happening any time soon, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1
|
|
|