• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault?

If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault?


  • Total voters
    25

digsbe

Truth will set you free
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
20,627
Reaction score
14,970
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault? The Republicans? The Democrats? The President? Who do you believe would be at fault if congress doesn't pass a spending bill that funds the government? Please explain your answers.
 
Last edited:
The option I would choose is who is most at fault. In that regard, I'd say democrats, but who is AT fault is all of the above. :)

Tim-
 
The American people for not demanding better governance and buying into the two party slug out war.

Congratulations.
 
In the grand scheme of things, I'd have to say the Democrats only because the budget for FY2011 should've been passed NLT September 30, 2010. Now, if both sides can't get their act together and pass a long-term budget, that's a different story. I'd say both parties would be to blame then because both sides are playing "chicken" with this issue. They need to stop!
 
Both parties hold some blame, however I put more blame on the Democrats as they had complete control of government when the Budget should've initially been passed and didn't get it done, and is now expecting great compromise out of a group that just took one of the houses in part on the basis of spending cuts so its unrealistic to expect that side to significantly compromise at this time.
 
If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault? The Republicans? The Democrats? The President? Who do you believe would be at fault if congress doesn't pass a spending bill that funds the government? Please explain your answers.

The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.
 
Both the congressional Republicans and Democrats are at fault. The president less so.

I hate the entire way we do annual budgets in this country. People shriek that spending is too high without even considering that in some cases, more spending now means less spending in the long run. I wish we had 5 year plans (or even better, 10 year plans) like they do in China, instead of annual budgets. Then we could worry more about how to reduce costs in the long run and minimize the structural deficit, instead of trying to minimize spending right now, which is stupid and counterproductive.
 
The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.

Republicans could easily say the same thing about the Democrats who are unwilling to compromise. Both parties are in a stale mate regarding the budget bill. However, I believe most of the blame is with the Democrats who didn't pass a budget when they had governing monopoly. I agree with Zyphlin's points. America voted in a largely Republican House mainly due to government spending, the Democrats need to recognize this and work with Republicans instead of trying to force them to comply to a large budget that Republicans and the American people want to greatly reduce.
 
Both parties hold some blame, however I put more blame on the Democrats as they had complete control of government when the Budget should've initially been passed and didn't get it done, and is now expecting great compromise out of a group that just took one of the houses in part on the basis of spending cuts so its unrealistic to expect that side to significantly compromise at this time.

The bolded is an important point that always, for some reason, seems to get overlooked.
 
The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.

No no no no...

I love how Liberals are trying to portray that their policies are the 'norm'. Their philosophies are waaaaayyy off base to the constitution.

We need drastic spending cuts, because of drastic un-balanced spending..... it's very simple
 
This is the best news ever!!! The government shutting down is exactly what we need.
 
I can't answer the poll, because they both are at fault. They both would rather have their ideological partisan slap fight instead of governing the country. Every member of the house, and senate should be ****ing ashamed of themselves.
 
Both the congressional Republicans and Democrats are at fault. The president less so.

I hate the entire way we do annual budgets in this country. People shriek that spending is too high without even considering that in some cases, more spending now means less spending in the long run. I wish we had 5 year plans (or even better, 10 year plans) like they do in China, instead of annual budgets. Then we could worry more about how to reduce costs in the long run and minimize the structural deficit, instead of trying to minimize spending right now, which is stupid and counterproductive.

Unlike China, America is run by the people and actually exspects the people to have a personal responsibility for themselves to improve this country, because we have liberty and are free. Give the people more money, NOT the government.
 
The last continuing resolution that passed the House, the one that expires this week, needed Democratic support to get through. Radical Republicans are once again showing their inability to be reasonable, accept fair compromises or govern responsibly.

And they'd be idiots to do it.

Those "radical republicans" were sworn into office literally just THREE months ago in large part due to their voters desire for siginificant cuts in the budget. It is absolutely unrealistic to expect them to significantly and sizably compromise even more than they already have (that 63 million is already a great deal less than what they originally promised) literally 3 months after gaining office in part to NOT do exactly what you're saying they must do.

Your idea of a "radical" republican is one that, upon immedietely entering office, gives their constituents the finger and says "HAHA, **** you, you gotta deal with my lying ass for 2 years".
 
Both the congressional Republicans and Democrats are at fault. The president less so.

I hate the entire way we do annual budgets in this country. People shriek that spending is too high without even considering that in some cases, more spending now means less spending in the long run. I wish we had 5 year plans (or even better, 10 year plans) like they do in China, instead of annual budgets. Then we could worry more about how to reduce costs in the long run and minimize the structural deficit, instead of trying to minimize spending right now, which is stupid and counterproductive.

This is an intriguing idea, though I think 5 years or 10 years is likely too much based on the way our electoral system works. I think I may start a thread in the Loft about this, as i don't want to derail this thread talking about proposed changes to a budgetary plan.
 
Unlike China, America is run by the people and actually exspects the people to have a personal responsibility for themselves to improve this country, because we have liberty and are free.

And this has what to do with what I wrote?

celticwar17 said:
Give the people more money, NOT the government.

Sometimes the best way to do that is to spend more now so that we don't have to spend as much later. For example, bridges are far cheaper and easier to maintain than to rebuild after they collapse. Or it's far cheaper for the government to chip in for preventative health care than to wait until the person is on Medicare and serious health problems develop. Or it's far cheaper to educate our kids well than to pay for a lifetime of unemployment, prisons, and antipoverty programs. Etc, etc.

The whole mindset that we need spending cuts RIGHT NOW is silly. The government is not in imminent danger of going bankrupt. Yes, we have some serious problems with the long-term structural deficit that need to be solved, but that's no reason to cut off valuable spending now.
 
Last edited:
Those "radical republicans" were sworn into office literally just THREE months ago in large part due to their voters desire for siginificant cuts in the budget. It is absolutely unrealistic to expect them to significantly and sizably compromise even more than they already have (that 63 million is already a great deal less than what they originally promised) literally 3 months after gaining office in part to NOT do exactly what you're saying they must do.

That might be true...if they had been elected with sizable mandates to control the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House. But they weren't. They control HALF of Congress and don't have the presidency.

Whether they like it or not, they are going to have to compromise in some way.
 
… Your idea of a "radical" republican is one that, upon immedietely entering office, gives their constituents the finger and says "HAHA, **** you, you gotta deal with my lying ass for 2 years".

My idea of a radical Republican is one who unconscionably threatens to force this nation into default and bring about a worldwide financial catastrophe by refusing to raise the debt ceiling unless they get their way. My idea of a radical Republican is one who attaches riders to must pass budget bills in inane assaults on long standing national policies regarding women's health services, public broadcasting and a host of their other pet peeves despite not having held a single hearing or obtained a single committee vote. My idea of a radical Republican is one who goes to Washington and recklessly pursues a course that may result in shutting down the federal government and derailing our frail economic recovery.
 
And this has what to do with what I wrote?



Sometimes the best way to do that is to spend more now so that we don't have to spend as much later. For example, bridges are far cheaper and easier to maintain than to rebuild after they collapse. Or it's far cheaper for the government to chip in for preventative health care than to wait until the person is on Medicare and serious health problems develop. Or it's far cheaper to educate our kids well than to pay for a lifetime of unemployment, prisons, and antipoverty programs. Etc, etc.

The whole mindset that we need spending cuts RIGHT NOW is silly. The government is not in imminent danger of going bankrupt. Yes, we have some serious problems with the long-term structural deficit that need to be solved, but that's no reason to cut off valuable spending now.

If you don't understand the correlation between those two statements... it's very sad. The first results in the second.

I don't agree with government construction... it should be privetly owned. And all these government funded programs can be improved with competition... which results in less spending.
Of course not everything can be done privately... but a good half chunk of it can
 
If the government shuts down due to defunding who is at fault? The Republicans? The Democrats? The President? Who do you believe would be at fault if congress doesn't pass a spending bill that funds the government? Please explain your answers.

The Reps don't really care if their bill passes or not. It's just another political gotcha to undermine Obama and gain ground to win the 2012 election... And these recalcitrant children actually control the House...

ricksfolly
 
Republicans could easily say the same thing about the Democrats who are unwilling to compromise. Both parties are in a stale mate regarding the budget bill. However, I believe most of the blame is with the Democrats who didn't pass a budget when they had governing monopoly. I agree with Zyphlin's points. America voted in a largely Republican House mainly due to government spending, the Democrats need to recognize this and work with Republicans instead of trying to force them to comply to a large budget that Republicans and the American people want to greatly reduce.

I guess it comes down to which is worse: the government shutting down, or not getting enough spending cuts in the bill?

If the GOP cared more about seeing the government shut down, then, I think, they would have given Congress a bill that would have been more likely to pass. However, I think the entire procedure and way of passing the budget is messed up. Like somebody else said, maybe we should have long term budgets, not short term.
 
No no no no...

I love how Liberals are trying to portray that their policies are the 'norm'. Their philosophies are waaaaayyy off base to the constitution.

We need drastic spending cuts, because of drastic un-balanced spending..... it's very simple

I am tired of hearing people say the liberals hate the Constitution... Obama hates the Constitution, when it was Bush who told us to stop "throwing the Constitution in his face" and that "it's just a piece of paper."

Exactly which liberal stances are clearly against the Constitution?
 
That might be true...if they had been elected with sizable mandates to control the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the White House. But they weren't. They control HALF of Congress and don't have the presidency.

Whether they like it or not, they are going to have to compromise in some way.

And as I pointed out, the amount that Republicans are suggesting ot cut from the current budget is SMALLER than what they campaigned on, IE a compromised number aimed at being more likely to be pased. That said, whether or not they took all the chambers of government, at the very least the 90 or so new house members who specifically were voted in largely due to the demand by their consituents to significantly cut spending would have to be complete idiots to go from the 100 billion they campaigned on down to 15 or 30 billion. That's compromising down to an almost 75% decrease from what they promised just a few months ago to get elected. They've already compromised by dropping down to about 60% of what they campaigned on by saying ~$60 billion in cuts. All houses or just one, it is unrealistic and ignorant to expect or base your actions off the assumption that people who literally just started 3 months ago in large part due to cuts in spending are going to cave and compromise to almost 25% or less of what they campaigned on within spitting distance of being placed into office.

But then, your post makes my other point. It is more the Democrats fault than the Republicans at this point because the Democrats DID have control of the House, Senate, and Presidency and yet still didn't pass a Budget during the first quarter of the Fiscal Year.
 
I guess it comes down to which is worse: the government shutting down, or not getting enough spending cuts in the bill?

As someone working for the government and will be significantly affected by a shut down...

Not getting enough spending cuts.

They already compromised from their campaign promises by dropping from 100 Billion to 63 billion. Now they're being told they need to compromise on their compromised number. This House was elected in large part due to the desire for Fiscal Responsability. If they bend to the point that their line may as well start resembling a circle just THREE MONTHS into being in office then they may as well kiss any hope for fiscal responsability with regards to the budgets to the curb for the next 2 years, and any good hope of Republican wins in 2012 and continued control of the budget can go right along with it.

So in my mind...yes, if it takes 2 weeks or a month of government shut down to actually show that they, and the people who elected them, are serious about cutting spending then so be it. The short term harm is worth the long term gain.

If they honestly didn't care about a government shut down at all there never would've been the past two CR's that they passed.
 
As someone working for the government and will be significantly affected by a shut down...

Not getting enough spending cuts.

They already compromised from their campaign promises by dropping from 100 Billion to 63 billion. Now they're being told they need to compromise on their compromised number. This House was elected in large part due to the desire for Fiscal Responsability. If they bend to the point that their line may as well start resembling a circle just THREE MONTHS into being in office then they may as well kiss any hope for fiscal responsability with regards to the budgets to the curb for the next 2 years, and any good hope of Republican wins in 2012 and continued control of the budget can go right along with it.

So in my mind...yes, if it takes 2 weeks or a month of government shut down to actually show that they, and the people who elected them, are serious about cutting spending then so be it. The short term harm is worth the long term gain.

If they honestly didn't care about a government shut down at all there never would've been the past two CR's that they passed.

What if their demands are still unmet, then what will happen? Would it be worth it then?
 
Back
Top Bottom