As we approach one more potential government shutdown thanks to a legislature that hasn't actually passed a budget in years. Favoring a succession of CR's which just automatically increase spending. We're seeing support from all sorts of places for exempting aid to Ukraine from the government shutdown. How is this absolutely insane notion gaining traction. By what warped insanity would anyone decide that we should deprive US citizens, while shoveling unaccountable billions to Ukraine. I'd love to be able to say that this steaming pile of excrement was the brainchild of the DFL, but unfortunately it seems to be bipartisan.
Friday, September 22, 2023
Government Shutdown
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Oh, absolutely! There are way too many Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn types who believe "stopping Putin" is far above any other concern about which they should be focusing their attention and our money. As he is now one of my senators, having moved to SC, I've already sent him my opinion on this and other issues. I will continue to do so, because that's what a citizen who lives in a country allegedly governed by the consent of the people is supposed to do. What good it will do by itself is likely nill. What it can do added to the contact by most of the state can be most compelling to someone in his position. There's never enough of it.
One of my kids is preparing for the shutdown as we speak. Fortunately his part of the USDA is not 100% funded by the government, so they'll get 1/2 of their pay until this gets figured out. It sucks for him, and the timing isn't great. But they perform a necessary service and it could be worse for him.
All interference in spending during shutdowns must begin with Congress itself. Not a single one of those people should be drawing a paycheck...and none of them should get back pay once the struggle ends. If they can't survive on their insider trading, too bad.
Then all heads of departments should come next. No soldiers should ever suffer, but the top people in the military perhaps...particularly top Pentagon, CIA, Justice Department, etc., should be forced to do the suffering. All the top people have input. The grunts don't, though I don't much care about the typical government worker who sees their gig as easy money. The pain of a shut down must first be felt by those whose actions or non-actions result in a shutdown. This should be how they determine who will or won't get paid.
Keep in mind, the government shuts down every day, every holiday and Congress is out of session for an extended period. To pretend a shutdown is fatal is a bullshit ploy meant by each party to indict the other as "holding America hostage". Yet, it is true for the Dems more than the GOP. They're the side which most thinks our money is theirs to waste as it suits them to do so.
Some are whining about the "America First" people, like Gaetz or Green, for example. But their basic point is sound. Congress needs to cut spending and devote more of what they spend to stopping the flow of invaders at our borders.
I agree that any pain from any shutdowns should be felt first and hardest by those at the top. They've put us in this situation, and they should bear the responsibility for the results of their actions.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, they need to stop funding the government by temporary CR and get back to their constitutional duty to pass a budget and spending bills. Obviously they need to move to a zero based budget, examine every single program and department to determine whether or not it adds value, and cut where appropriate. It's too easy to spend like drunken sailors (I intend no insult to drunken sailors, they probably have more restraint.) when you're spending someone else's money and mistakenly believe that there's an infinite supply of tax revenue out there.
The most galling aspect is the constant increases in spending, and the fallacious debates over how much to increase instead of whether or not an increase is even necessary for the program in question to function. And as you suggest, there's very little incentive to admit a program is no longer necessary. They should parrot what Trump did with regulations: you want to increase spending here? Provide two areas where we'll first cut spending in each, and by a similar amount in each.
One more thing, and this can't be stated often enough, if not screamed in their ears on a daily basis: Government must now tighten its belt as it has forced us to tighten ours.
It is vital that we go to zero based budgeting, instead of just increasing every line item by X% every year. We absolutely need to get rid of things that are no longer useful or needed. Again, since they don't understand that the money that is being spent is coming from ordinary citizens and don't have any accountability for that money there's no incentive to actually spend responsibly.
There's a meme going around that says something about reducing the pay of legislators based on the size of the yearly deficit. That sounds like a good plan.
As long as there are folx like Dan who'll cheer virtually every dollar government spends because they believe that they can just raise taxes or borrow the money with no consequences, the legislators will just keep spending.
I was listening to Mark Levin talk about this recent shut down threat. He recalled a interview he did with Paul Ryan...a guy of whom he doesn't speak well these days...and Ryan stated that during a government shutdown, 80% of what the government does continues. No Republican should ever let Dems guilt them into spending to "keep the government open". If Democrat lips are moving, they're lying to us.
That's probably True. What's interesting is that the DFL chooses to target that 20% in ways that cause the most harm to the most vulnerable for the sake of sound bytes in the MSM.
That's from their evil natures. In order to garner support, they must cause harm to the most vulnerable. It's how they roll.
As I demonstrated in a post earlier this year, the entire notion of a government shutdown as peddled by the DFL and MSM is a false narrative. But hey if you want to vote for the party that chooses to deprive seniors of SS, instead of their legislators making personal sacrifices, that's certainly your choice.
And choose that they do! The problem is how clearly it shows the lack of desire to really learn who are those they support with their votes. Or worse, it shows they don't care just how bad they are and vote for them anyway, preferring to pretend because they support so much of the immoral policies they promote.
Post a Comment