Possibility of a U.S. Government Shutdown

[Tropic Storm 15]

In a battle between party lines, unless if an agreement is made today at 12 midnight on Friday, April 8th, the United States federal government may shut down for an indefinite period of time.

What are your opinions?

CNN

Government shutdown nears

Hill leaders blame each other as shutdown nears

BBC

US budget: Talks go on as government shutdown looms

UPDATE

A budget extension to keep the U.S. government afloat has been reached! Government funding will now be extended for another week until April 15th as lawmakers plan how to tighten the budget by the end of the fiscal year.

CNN | Democrats, Republicans agree on a budget deal

  Edited April 9, 2011 by Tropic Storm  

[Mikeaut1 261]

Scary stuff to think about. Wouldn't this shutdown of the government also make the US more prone to terrorist strikes? I know the military and defense operations aren't really affected by the situation, but in my opinion I feel like terrorists would pick a time such as this issue in the federal government to execute an attack.

[un1 41]

Wouldn't this shutdown of the government also make the US more prone to terrorist strikes?

I don't think they would have enough time to plan one out, but one of the less known (possibly domestic) groups could attack. I doubt security would change at airports if the government were to shut down.

[Meg 368]

They should stop acting like a bunch of kindergartners. They are all going to take their ball and go home unless it's done their way.

The whole thing is unbecoming of anyone over the age of 6, much less elected officials. If the government shuts down (which will costs millions in and of itself, btw) a lot of innocent people are going to feel the pain. Not paying the families of our military? What possible excuse is there for that?

Yes, the government wastes a lot of money and needs to be trimmed down. No one is disputing that. But let's cut the fat in a logical fashion. This nonsense is just stupid.

[Mister Giggles 310]

"Government shutdown" is misnomer. Essential employees of the government (Intelligence, defense, administration) will still continue to work. They may not be paid (Military), but they'll still be working. No worries about terrorists here, folks. The term government shutdown is being used as a political football by both parties in order to garner support for their ideas. They rely on people being ignorant of what a government shutdown actually is in order to spook people and make them support things/people they may not normally support. Yes, it's a morally bankrupt practice.

[Tropic Storm 15]

They should stop acting like a bunch of kindergartners. They are all going to take their ball and go home unless it's done their way.

The whole thing is unbecoming of anyone over the age of 6, much less elected officials. If the government shuts down (which will costs millions in and of itself, btw) a lot of innocent people are going to feel the pain. Not paying the families of our military? What possible excuse is there for that?

Yes, the government wastes a lot of money and needs to be trimmed down. No one is disputing that. But let's cut the fat in a logical fashion. This nonsense is just stupid.

Here here. This is taking things a little too far, and I'm quite surprised we haven't resorted to tearing each other apart. I have a feeling this is the result of too much partisan bickering and one really hellbent opposition.

However, not all hope is lost. I remembered a few months back when the BBC reported Belgium had a shutdown of their central government from cultural tensions between Flanders and Wallonia.

Here something from TIME Magazine this year

Belgian Waffling: Who Needs Government, Anyway?

Ironically some loved having no government. The thing though in their case was local governments took control of what the federal government had ceased. Belgium had a way to pay their workers and manage federal services, we don't (then again, they didn't cease their parliament for financial reasons!). If this shutdown is to happen, the state governments needs to find a way to establish makeshift departments (local army, state IRS system, etc.) to ofset the lack of a federal entity. If not, things might get quite ugly.

  Edited April 8, 2011 by Tropic Storm  

[warrior 169]

How have you americans not overturned the government yet, and implemented a completely new democratic system.

How long has you political system been functioning? Hundreds of years? Technology means these systems don't work as well, as they rely on people not being able to speak out to the entire world.

Can't you just get rid of the Democratic/Republican divide (get rid of parties in general) and come up with a better system. I'm always hearing of the Republicans this, and the Democratics that. Surely it doesn't matter who is in who's party, just what they stand for.

At the very least you should get rid of the politicians/etc and get new ones who haven't been trained as politicians but are normal people who actually care about the country.

People talk about America being the best democracy in the world, however it seems quite clear that most Americans do not want to go anywhere near this "Government shutting down". To me this doesn't sound like a democracy, but rather the same old type of people talking on and on and on, and getting their country into trouble. (same happens in england)

  Edited April 8, 2011 by warrior  

[WillR116 60]

Yeah, speaking as someone from Washington, Employees who have essential tasks will still work, I'm in a government family and I know that one of my folks will still be working and the other wont. Just no pay.

[Meg 368]

I have a feeling this is the result of too much partisan bickering and one really hellbent opposition.

It is a result of too much partisan bickering. The real "opposition", however, is al Qaida and groups of that ilk. They must think it's hilarious that we think the opposition is each other.

If this shutdown is to happen, the state governments needs to find a way to establish makeshift departments (local army, state IRS system, etc.) to ofset the lack of a federal entity. If not, things might get quite ugly.

err . . . the state governments do not have the money or the preparation to do what you are suggesting.

Can't you just get rid of the Democratic/Republican divide (get rid of parties in general) and come up with a better system. I'm always hearing of the Republicans this, and the Democratics that. Surely it doesn't matter who is in who's party, just what they stand for.

That is how it is supposed to work. I think it would be great if we dismantled the national party organizations. They cause as many problems as some of the overblown government agencies.

[Tropic Storm 15]

err . . . the state governments do not have the money or the preparation to do what you are suggesting.

Likewise with Belgium. Per-person, they're in even more debt than the United States (like 200-300% to GDP).

  Edited April 8, 2011 by Tropic Storm  

[warrior 169]

I don't understand how they can work but not get paid, doesn't that amount to some kind of mild slavery or something?

What would happen if they were all to stop working? This system makes no sense at all. It seems it exists to make a bad situation, even worse.

I'm betting it won't be long before the protests in the middle east spread into the west. If I'm completely honest I'm hoping the next few years will be known as the years that many countries political systems were revamped.

[Meg 368]

err . . . the state governments do not have the money or the preparation to do what you are suggesting.

Likewise with Belgium. Per-person, they're in even more debt than the United States.

There are practical ways to reform things and then there are chaotic ways.

Just shutting something down is a very chaotic way to reform anything.

For example, take the following reasoning: Using oil makes us dependent on foreign governments and it's bad for the environment therefore we shouldn't use it. Let's shut down all of the oil wells and refineries and then we will have to figure out something else.

If someone (whoever that would be in this case) decided to follow through on that line of reasoning, things would be very bad for a very long time.

Yes, change and transition are difficult for many people. Why make it worse just out of pigheadedness?

[Mayorm 14]

one thing I don't understand is that the military would not be paid, but congress is still getting thier saleries!

[Easy Bakes 253]

Not paying the soldiers? good luck with not paying the people with the Tanks and Guns.

don't worry they will just print more money to run things and not solve the problem.

So the Govt is out of money yet they are still pushing hard as they can for Nation health care. It would be laughable if it was not so serious.

[Tropic Storm 15]

err . . . the state governments do not have the money or the preparation to do what you are suggesting.

Likewise with Belgium. Per-person, they're in even more debt than the United States.

There are practical ways to reform things and then there are chaotic ways.

Just shutting something down is a very chaotic way to reform anything.

For example, take the following reasoning: Using oil makes us dependent on foreign governments and it's bad for the environment therefore we shouldn't use it. Let's shut down all of the oil wells and refineries and then we will have to figure out something else.

If someone (whoever that would be in this case) decided to follow through on that line of reasoning, things would be very bad for a very long time.

Yes, change and transition are difficult for many people. Why make it worse just out of pigheadedness?

There are easier ways and man do they love to choose the hard way. That's just the way with politics here. It don't do much but they get their point across, and they get millions of cult followers for doing so. Its funny, how some people hate change, yet they want radical policy.

God I love this country. It's so unpredictable I could just hate it.

  Edited April 8, 2011 by Tropic Storm  

[warrior 169]

why is this even a law? I don't understand what a shutdown achieves and what problem it solved when it was introduced?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Seems to me like shutting it down and starting it back in a week up does absolutely nothing to save any money.

[Meg 368]

why is this even a law? I don't understand what a shutdown achieves and what problem it solved when it was introduced?

The government does the budget each year. Each agency submits a budget for what it thinks it needs and Congress messes around with it until it likes it and passes the budget. Until the budget is passed, the agencies are not funded. Without funding, they can't pay anyone.

Right now, various people are disagreeing about what should be in the budget. Group A wants X to be (or not be) in the budget. Group B wants Y to be (or not be) in the budget. and so forth.

Instead of coming up with a reasonable compromise, they are digging in their heels and stomping their feet until they get what they want.

What does it achieve? Nothing much, really. It shows the world that various people can bring the government to a halt if they want to. If you are into playing "mine is bigger than yours", that is considered to be winning.

What problem does it solve? Nothing much, really. We all know the budget needs to be reduced and the government agencies need to be overhauled. But we aren't going to get there by having the people involved holding their breath until they turn blue.

Having been involved in government agency mergers, consolidations, and reorganizations, I can tell you it isn't any fun. People like doing things the way they have been doing them because that is the way they have been doing them. (Never understood that reasoning myself but it seems to be popular.)

Part of the issue is that everyone is out to protect his own turf. Very few people see the big picture. They just want to cling to their little piece of it, which makes it difficult for those who are trying to eliminate redundancies. No one likes to be called redundant so they will fight to the bitter end claiming they aren't; it's the other guy.

Seems to me like shutting it down and starting it back in a week up does absolutely nothing to save any money.

It won't save a thing. In fact, it will cost more. For instance, right now, employees on travel are being recalled from wherever they are, leaving the job unfinished. When all of this is over, they will get to go back and try to pick it up where they left off.

Little know fact: shutting down the US government means the trash in Washington, DC will not get collected. There goes years of trying to control the rat population.

[Easy Bakes 253]

How is the trash not operated by the City governent?

[sneakeypete 16]

I've said it before and, heck, i'll probably say it again: The US needs to detatch itself from tradition a bit. Your system obviously has some quirks, get rid of them. This government shutdown is one such thing.

Then again if you can't even do the stuff you need to avoid the shutdown, i guess you can't do the stuff to get rid of it either

[Tropic Storm 15]

I've said it before and, heck, i'll probably say it again: The US needs to detatch itself from tradition a bit. Your system obviously has some quirks, get rid of them. This government shutdown is one such thing.

Then again if you can't even do the stuff you need to avoid the shutdown, i guess you can't do the stuff to get rid of it either

If we needed the shutdown in the first place, then our lawmakers need a some counseling over here.

[Meg 368]

How is the trash not operated by the City governent?

The DC city government is treated like a federal agency, budget-wise. DC can't have a budget unless Congress approves it, even if the funds are being raised by DC city taxes.

It gets better: DC residents do not have a voting representative in Congress.

We were taught in school that "taxation without representation is tyranny". The residents of DC have always lived that way.

DC is not a state; it has none of the rights that states do. and it would take a constitutional amendment to change it.

[Duke87 1,070]

Well, that's the thing about a divided government: people either have to work together or not work at all. Unfortunately, in this case it seems even that isn't forcing people to work together.

And therein is the problem: nobody in congress actually cares if there's a government shutdown or what the ramifications of it are. All they care is that whatever happens, they don't get blamed for it.

It's pretty much been decided. There will be a shutdown, probably fairly brief. And then the game is going to be "try as hard as you can to make people think it's the other party's fault" all the way to the next election in 2012.

Of course, it's utterly stupid. Everyone in America who has taken a side in the D vs R debate is going to blame "the other team" regardless. Very few independents are going to be swayed by the arguments of either side, and this is all just going to breed more anti-incumbent sentiment.

You would think these conditions would be ideal for the rise of a third party, but unless you count the Tea Party, that hasn't happened yet.

[manicwhofan 27]

The last time the Republicans forced a shut down with the government it blew up in thier faces. They were beaten soundly in the 1996 elections. Clinton went on to win a second term, both the Senate and House of Representatives went into the Democratic majority. This time Republicans are holding out on a provision that will fund Planned Parenthood. It isn't the money issue, it is a social and moral agenda from the far right members that they are trying to shove down our throats. The GOP is going to get it handed to them again if they keep this course of action up.

[zahrul3 472]

Unity =

Individualism = (thumbs down)

Unity is what creates a country. Indonesia has over 300 ethnic groups and rarely has been divided after reformation. America should think the same. You can't have true democracy when you have no unity and there are just 2 major parties that are opposites of one another. What the founding fathers invisionised is far than what you Americans actually have right now.

[Duke87 1,070]

It isn't just about parties. There is a very real political divide in America in the opinions of the people. We have a lot of very conservative and a lot of very liberal citizens, and they're not going to make nice with each other because their worldviews are just too different.

To a large degree, they get away with each doing their own thing, since they most likely live in different states and a lot of stuff is run on the state level or lower. But nationally, it becomes a big problem. We don't have one national identity anymore. The house is divided. America can't decide what it wants to be. We are headed directly for another civil war, although this one isn't going to be a military conflict.

[Mikeaut1 261]

Looks like the Democrats and Republicans agreed on a budget. Government will remain open for business! Phew...

[Meg 368]

and we get to go through it all again next week.

[-Lexus- 2]

The mightiest nation in the world, can cripple itself this easily? Oh wow, how you guys managed to hold on for so long is just amazing

Geez, toddlers would make for better elected government officials.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

This little flap belongs in the American Politics thread. Would someone please merge it? It has already been discussed there.