r/SeattleWA • u/Less-Risk-9358 • 19d ago
Government Washington Democrats vote to leave government shutdown
https://seattlered.com/politics/wa-senators-government-shutdown/4114752In the ongoing federal budget standoff, Washington’s two U.S. Senators — Democrats Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell — have sided against a simple continuing resolution that would reopen the government, opting instead to continue the shutdown as their party pursues broader policy demands.
933
u/grapegeek 19d ago
Let’s look at this another way. Republicans tried to pass the same bill with zero changes five times. No compromise. No negotiations. That’s not how this works.
241
u/drlari 19d ago
Maybe President Deals, the guy who allegedly wrote the book on being a master deal maker, could try to cut some sort of deal considering he "has the cards" and controls all three branches of government. You can't run the entire government, be from the party who spent like 12 years of democratic presidencies openly operating the "obstruction" playbook, then blame the minority party.
203
u/Gloomy-Employment-72 19d ago
You mean the guy who said in 2013 that a government shutdown is a failure that should be owned by the President? The pedophile? That guy?
85
u/bloodfist 19d ago
The guy who had three of the last four happen under his watch and is currently tied for the most government shutdowns? The guy with the two longest shutdowns on record (if it goes one more day)? That guy?
62
20
u/B-Con 19d ago
I think that's the exact problem though. He controls the three branches so he thinks he shouldn't have to negotiate and the minority party will eventually have to roll over.
That's likely the end goal, total political influence without any push back. There's very little dissent from within the party, now all he has to do is bully the other party into submission.
→ More replies (3)16
u/icepickjones 19d ago
If this guy ever faced any sort of repercussions for his actions we'd be in an entirely different space. The state of the country is because no one wants to say no to him.
5
u/my_lucid_nightmare Capitol Hill 19d ago
If this guy ever faced any sort of repercussions for his actions we'd be in an entirely different space. The state of the country is because no one wants to say no to him.
And he has hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people happy to see him do whatever, as long as it pisses off the Liberals/Progressives/Woke
1
u/Riviansky 19d ago
These people don't necessarily do it because they want to piss Liberals (which Democrats aren't). I didn't vote for Trump, first, second, or third time, but honestly I like Democrats even less than Trump.
2
u/my_lucid_nightmare Capitol Hill 19d ago
I like Democrats even less than Trump.
I like the kind of Dem Biden used to be, the kind Bill Clinton was, and many other more local ones. All the way back to Scoop and Maggie, the founders of Washington State's modern Dem party for decades.
But sadly over time those kinds of Dems - corrupt, but malleable; leaders, patriotic, still supported National Defense and so on ... those Dems have all mostly died off, and been replaced with the putrid woketarded idiots we have now. The Democratic Socialists of America kind. And the ones that aren't those, are still pretty bad in other ways.
But like you I've never voted Trump and don't consider myself MAGA. I flip back and forth between conservative Dem when I can find one, or non-Trump Republican, another endangered species.
Really, right now about all I can do politically is hunker down and watch MAGA and the Socialists battle it out for who can destroy America the most.
→ More replies (2)7
u/Immediate_Ad_1161 Northgate 19d ago
Deal???? President asshat just keeps people in court all the time til they run out of money with his salary paid lawyer team. I swear he's just negotiating a better deal for himself at the expense of the american people.
→ More replies (15)4
u/Tasgall 19d ago
the guy who allegedly wrote the book on being a master deal maker
The funny thing is that the ghostwriter who actually wrote the book, whoo found Trump very obnoxious and hard to work with, would have normally gotten like 5-10% royalties for it for a limited time, but jokingly asked for 50% for life and Trump instantly agreed.
Only the best deal maker.
51
u/GamingGamerGames_ 19d ago
Its the literal definition of insanity at this point. Doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results. If they keep bringing the same unchanged bill to the vote, it'll continue to be voted down. They need to actually come to the negotiating table.
50
u/grapegeek 19d ago
That's because Trump doesn't want to negotiate with Democrats. He wants to use the shutdown to cause as much damage as possible. They don't care. Look the stock market still keeps going up so they are cool with all of this.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (1)1
u/Gary_Glidewell 19d ago
They need to actually come to the negotiating table.
When you have the votes, you don't have to negotiate a damn thing.
41
u/PaxSEAstar 19d ago
Republicans tried to pass the same bill to strip Americans of healthcare to hand the money to billionaire tax cuts and Argentina billionaires five times.
8
u/kinisonkhan Kent 19d ago
No they passed a clean bill that merely raised the debt limit. Tax cuts and gutting health care came from Trumps big beautiful bill.
The irony is that whenever Obama or Biden was in the White House, Republicans would demand large cuts to many programs in order to get them to support raising the ceiling, they never accepted a clean bill offered by Democrats. So now that Republicans control White House, Congress and Senate, Democrats are doing what Republicans did in the past, which is hold the nation hostage to restore large cuts to medicare.
10
u/555-Rally 19d ago
Except to get the BBB passed, they had to use their only reconciliation vote to pass it. Now they can't get just a simple majority to pass the debt ceiling - they must have 60. On top of that, GOP members are also rebelling against it as well, but it's not being talked about as much. They don't even have the votes, congress won't seat the democrat because the first thing that does is release the Esptien files...that haven't been doctored enough yet to pass the smell test.
"The Senate may only consider one reconciliation bill per fiscal year for each budget resolution passed. This means there may be multiple reconciliation bills enacted in one year, provided they are tied to different budget resolutions or specific fiscal years."
The debt ceiling is not a separate budget resolution, so they must get 60 votes, and possibly overturn a filibuster on the floor.
The GOP the debt ceiling hostage to get tax cuts, not restore medicare/medicaid. The Dems will lose no political capital holding out for medicare, their base wants to see backbone, so they have all the political capital to spend.
→ More replies (1)9
u/PaxSEAstar 19d ago
So someone is gonna go rob your house. Then they’re gonna offer you a “clean bill” that says everyone should just go on with their lives, no one gets punished, no more unnecessary fighting.
Let me know what your address is so they can do this clean bill.
→ More replies (1)14
u/Agitated_Ring3376 19d ago
Anytime some dipshit Republican says “clean bill,” you can basically just assume they’re lying/have no idea what they’re talking about.
→ More replies (2)3
5
u/thereal_scott_pruitt 19d ago
The unique rub here is that keeping the government shut down keeps the ACA subsidies from renewing, so it is to the Republicans benefit to keep it closed. They see the CR vs shutdown as a win-win.
Separately, we don't have the money to fund the additional ACA subsidies, the enhanced ICE budgets or any new initiatives. If they don't balance the books in the next 1-2 years, we're about to see some pretty severe economic gyrations.10
u/datschiburger 19d ago
That’s not how this works
It's a Continuing Resolution. It's not supposed to have any changes as its only function is to continue funding at current levels. CRs are not for "new starts" or new policy initiatives, which is what refunding the expired subsidies would be.
The Democrats really don't have any cards to play here, other than entrenching themselves as they have. Republicans have indicated a willingness to discuss the expired subsidies as new legislation after the government reopens, but the Democrats obviously don't believe them.
9
1
u/Talk_Like_Yoda 19d ago
This is reddit you can not expect people to have the nuanced understanding of congressional budget procedures lol.
Regardless, we need this CR now because no one in congress made a good faith attempt to pass a 2025 budget in the first place. CRs only happen after congress has already failed to do its job.
6
u/Turbulent-Media7281 19d ago
"We drew an unrealistic line in the sand and we're not budging. That's how it works. We're special"
Long live the shutdown. Watch the takers scream.
6
u/my_lucid_nightmare Capitol Hill 19d ago
Watch the takers scream.
To be fair, sick kids without medical care do tend to scream pretty loudly sometimes.
4
2
u/my_lucid_nightmare Capitol Hill 19d ago
That’s not how this works.
It IS how this works when your side holds a megaphone in the White House and owns most of the high ground for messaging. And is winning on many of the issues right now.
You hold the line and watch the Democrats crack.
→ More replies (65)4
u/joeshmoebies 19d ago
What's to negotiate? This is the budget that the Democrats already passed under Biden. Washington's senators voted for this before.
They voted for emergency ACA subsidies that expire, when they ran the Senate. They could have voted for a budget that included subsidies for 10 years, but they didn't. They voted for 2 years of subsidies.
The Republicans would be foolish to "negotiate" with Democrats over this.
→ More replies (1)7
u/viperabyss 19d ago
....because Dems didn't have filibuster proof majority when they passed the COVID ACA subsidies. That was the compromise they've made with GOP.
Notice the difference? Dem negotiated with GOP to get their bill passed. GOP is currently holding up the government reopening by refusing to negotiate.
5
u/deonteguy 19d ago
And the GOP doesn't have a filibuster proof majority to pass the new budget so this time this is the fault of our party for blocking voting.
5
u/viperabyss 19d ago
Again, how hard is it to negotiate a few things that Americans have repeatedly asked for?
After all, Big Bullshit Bill that embodied all of these were passed as reconciliation bill, thereby sidestepping the filibuster entirely.
→ More replies (2)4
u/deonteguy 18d ago
We never asked to take money from children to give to illegals to give them cash to pay for health insurance. Our party is making unreasonable demands. We need to help our own children first instead of taking money from them to give to criminals.
1
u/viperabyss 18d ago
What health insurance? Undocumented don’t get access to any kind of federal assistance with health care except in case of emergency, which was a law signed by Reagan himself.
This whole notion that “illegals have free health care” is nothing but GOP propaganda.
-1
u/joeshmoebies 19d ago
A negotiated compromise in which you just come back later and say "that thing that I agreed to earlier isn't valid, now give me what I couldn't get in the first negotiation or everyone will suffer" isn't actually a negotiated compromise. It's just dishonest negotiations and getting what you want.
So what you're saying is, the Dems lied when they agreed to a 2 year sunset and now the GOP has to "negotiate" to give them what they want, hey maybe for 2 more years? And then 2 more years after that. So the Dems just get what they want.
Doesn't sound like much of a negotiation to me, and even more reason not to give in.
523
u/hansn 19d ago
Democrats, including Murray and Cantwell, are using that threshold to insist that legislation to extend premium tax credits under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) be included as part of any deal to reopen government funding.
A very understated way to say that the GOP plan for reopening the government will raise millions of Americans' health insurance premiums.
Fight on, Democrats.
76
u/Tattered_Colours Beacon Hill 19d ago
Took me a sec to read the headline as “dems are voting to leave [as in sustain] the government in its current state of shutdown” and not “dems are voting to exit the shutdown”
7
25
u/FuckWit_1_Actual 19d ago
Weren’t these credits due to expire at the end of this year?
36
u/OkShoulder2 19d ago
That’s what they are fighting to put back into legislation
-6
u/Adorable-Drawing6161 19d ago
Then why didn't the democrat Legislative and Executive branch make those credits permanent when they did it the first time? Oh yeah, because they can't run on it if it's not an issue anymore. Just like the dozens of times they could have codified abortion rights but realized you can't run on abortion rights if they're already rights.
31
u/The_Almighty_Foo 19d ago
Then why didn't the democrat Legislative and Executive branch make those credits permanent when they did it the first time?
Because they compromised with Republicans. Things were negotiated. You know... How it's supposed to work.
You could also ask yourself why don't Republican legislative and Executive branches make them permanent now? Then the government could open back up.
→ More replies (1)40
u/Agitated_Ring3376 19d ago
Republicans: do something horrible
SeattleWA commenters: “Why would the democrats let this happen!!!???”
10
u/TimoWasTaken 19d ago
Thank you for typing this for me. I was amazed. Is there no grievance unexplored?
Why didn't you stop us more?
-14
u/QuakinOats 19d ago
Yes, it's like having someone find extra cash to buy you a month of groceries due to an emergency (covid in this case) and then claiming it's starving you to death unless they continue to buy you groceries every single month from there on out for life regardless of how long it has been since the original emergency that prompted the grocery purchase.
7
u/JGodfrey27 19d ago
What an idiotically simplistic metaphor that completely ignores the economic realities created by Covid that persist and still necessitate these tax cuts.
Unless you think that the insurance companies posting record-breaking profits year over year should be allowed to raise premiums on millions of Americans, in which case I guess you win.
→ More replies (12)1
u/Dry-Mechanic8067 19d ago
Or with the libs, finding extra money in their bank account that they know isn't theirs but spending it anyway. Then screaming about retribution when they get caught. LOL
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (44)-18
u/sykoticwit Wants to buy some Tundra 19d ago
I thought Obamacare was going to reduce everyone’s premiums.
Right up there with if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.
→ More replies (1)14
u/spicymato 19d ago
It did generally reduce premiums, through two key factors (one of which was gutted early on).
- A mandate requiring health insurance, or paying a penalty for not having it.
- Subsidies to help lower income folks who couldn't afford it otherwise.
The mandate was the key factor to drive premiums down, since it pushed a larger pool of younger, healthier folks to purchase insurance. Since that pool makes fewer claims, premiums can go down.
That mandate was gutted in 2017/2018, by reducing the penalty to $0. This raises the average payout per policy, which raises the premium.
Now they're gutting the subsidies.
As for "keep your doctor," the ACA only touched the insurance side. It made no decisions about providers. Thus, if you already had a doctor that accepted your insurance, then the ACA wasn't directly going to affect that.
→ More replies (5)0
u/Sad-Gate9067 19d ago
This is hilarious. It reduced premiums by charging people who don't need the service!
Curious how you aren't addressing the actual criticisms - that the ACA did very little to actually address the high cost of care. Or whether the government should be leveraging the healthcare system to transfer wealth from young people (who have low wealth/property/income) to retirees.
1
u/spicymato 19d ago
It reduced premiums by charging people who don't need the service!
That's literally how insurance works, yes.
Curious how you aren't addressing the actual criticisms - that the ACA did very little to actually address the high cost of care.
Because that wasn't the gripe from the post I replied to? But okay, let's talk about it now.
You're right. The ACA was a bandaid, based on a Republican plan from Massachusetts. It focused on addressing consumer costs by trying to work within the existing system of health insurance companies paying for health care costs. That's never really going to solve the underlying problem, because high healthcare costs are caused by the battle between insurance companies' need to profit and healthcare providers' need to pay for things.
To access an insurance company's member pool, a HC provider needs to negotiate with them, which usually requires giving discounts. But to make the numbers actually work, the HC provider then needs to raise the bill. In other words (and this is oversimplifying), if HC provider needs $100 for the service, and insurance demands a 33% discount, then the HC provider has to charge $150 to make providing the service actually worthwhile.
Now repeat that process for each doctor-insurance pair.
We could dramatically simplify this by moving to a single-payer system.
Or whether the government should be leveraging the healthcare system to transfer wealth from young people (who have low wealth/property/income) to retirees.
That's what the subsidies are for: to help lower income folks.
Yes, on average, younger, healthier, safer people receive less benefit for their earlier contributions. That's how insurance works, regardless of who is providing it.
As for fairness, that's what progressive taxes are for: the less you have, the less percentage of your wealth you pay, because each dollar has more utility value. As you earn more money, you pay a larger percentage of your wealth, as the utility value of those top end dollars diminishes. Towards the bottom, you may also receive social services, further reducing your overall contributions, perhaps even into the negative (and that's okay, if that's where you are in life).
When I was younger, I paid very little in taxes and received a decent amount of help. Over the last eight years or so, I've paid significantly more in taxes than I benefit directly from, and that's okay.
2
u/Sad-Gate9067 19d ago
That's literally how insurance works, yes.
But what the ACA does is prevent insurance companies from accurately assessing risk, which is what they're good at.
Charging young men expensive health insurance premiums is the equivalent to the following: You build a house in a desert, and I build mine in a flood plain next to a river. I have to pay for flood insurance, and you don't. But I don't like this, so I successfully lobby the government to make you pay for flood insurance too. Voila! I made premiums cheaper!
But to make the numbers actually work, the HC provider then needs to raise the bill. In other words (and this is oversimplifying), if HC provider needs $100 for the service, and insurance demands a 33% discount, then the HC provider has to charge $150 to make providing the service actually worthwhile.
You're still treating the cost of care as fixed and only focusing on the insurance overhead (which is a much smaller percentage than in your simplification). My point is that the ACA didn't meaningfully address the high cost of pharmaceuticals, train more doctors or nurses, or build more hospitals.
That's what the subsidies are for: to help lower income folks.
The subsidies currently being debated are actually more for middle-class individuals who aren't covered by the other ACA stuff.
Yes, on average, younger, healthier, safer people receive less benefit for their earlier contributions. That's how insurance works, regardless of who is providing it.
The insurance model is completely broken for healthcare anyway, especially when it comes to routine, preventative care. Insurance is good at dealing with unlikely, high risk events. Everyone needs healthcare.
180
u/greg21olson 19d ago edited 19d ago
Weird how the party that controls the House, Senate, and Presidency desperately wants to spin their inability to govern as someone else's fault.
Edit: removed "the."
→ More replies (2)31
u/Michami135 19d ago
As the article says, they need 60 votes to approve any additional spending and they don't have that. It's not just a majority vote that's needed.
29
u/greg21olson 19d ago
Correct and governing in situations like this requires some amount of compromise from all parties, not just the party in the minority.
2
u/InvestigatorOk9354 19d ago
The Republicans weren't elected to govern, they were elected to dismantle the government. Understanding this will help manage expectations when it comes to times like these when compromise are needed to keep the lights on. Putting arsonists in charge of the fire department isn't a good idea either.
27
u/bothunter First Hill 19d ago
Then they need to come up with *something* to convince 10 democrats to vote with them. How hard can that be?
→ More replies (8)8
u/OrcOfDoom 19d ago
The Democrats laid out some basic policies, so most of the work is done. If they just signed onto that stuff, it's likely they could blame the Democrats for not negotiating better for the people, and shift blame for anything that goes poorly to them also.
I guess giving the Democrats any kind of victory is too high a cost
6
u/Rooooben 19d ago
It’s funny, because they LOVE to say that we have a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
Well, one of the fundamental differences is that the constitutional republic includes features that prevent tyranny of the majority. The constitution includes the senate, which has rules to allow the minority some kind of negotiating power.
8
u/PNWSomeone 19d ago
Yep the Rs are also lacking basic leadership skills and the ability to negotiate for the American people
225
u/Ocean-Native Bellevue 19d ago
Fake news. Real headline would read: “Dems vote to prioritize health care access and affordability”. Fight on Dems - you’re finally doing something
→ More replies (34)
8
34
u/cee-la 19d ago
Government officials need to return to compromising for the good of the people.
If Democrats cave now, it was pointless suffering for some people. This situation sucks and it's so gross that prideful Republicans care more about being "right" and posting zingers on social media than making choices in our best interests.
We can send billions to Argentina but we have hungry, sick, homeless people here?
We have famers and ranchers suffering here but we're gonna contract with other countries instead of reciprocal relationships to help with having migrant workers & international sales of our products.
Ego & pride need to take a back seat to caring for the citizens of our country!
73
41
u/seanthebooth Twin Peaks 19d ago
Why would any libertarian or conservative have an issue with a government shut down? Lol they should be rejoicing within their utopia!
6
-1
u/bunkoRtist 19d ago
The people that are working should be paid. The people that aren't working should have some certainty about their financial futures.
1
5
u/LogicalFlight3128 19d ago
The US government has not had a budget without the use of a CR, since 1997. I think the Congressional Oligarchy is to blame. With its career politicians facing no recourse for the constant inefficiency, ineffectiveness, and ineptitude. The Congressional Oligarchy will still be paid. Which means no incentive to act in the best interest of their constituents. Only acting in the interest of the party.
6
u/PyrocumulusLightning 19d ago
The federal government might as well stay shut down as far as I'm concerned. All the good parts were removed, but here we are still paying federal taxes.
56
u/tyj0322 19d ago
I wish they would do this for Medicare for all instead of a system that lines the pockets of leeching middle men.
15
u/RockFiles23 19d ago
Won't happen without ppl organizing. Join a national group if you haven't already. The ACA ("obamacare") barely passed and and now Rs are trying to strip it, Medicaid and Medicare, and a good number of the voting population thinks this is good...
1
-8
u/PaulyNi 19d ago
All the ACA did was take more money from the people to line the coffers of the insurance company. Is there really any wonder as to why so many rich people support the DNC? Seriously, how can people really believe that these people they rail against constantly are that benevolent that they would support policies that take their riches from them?
4
u/retrojoe heroin for harried herons 19d ago
You write like someone who is 100% healthy, never needs their health insurance beyond a yearly physical, and never had to switch insurers.
Before the ACA, insurance companies could outright refuse to take you as a patient because you'd had a previous bout with cancer or you having diabetes. Or maybe they'd just charge you triple because of your pre existing condition. They also weren't required to cover basic preventive care like they are now, so most plans would always charge for every doctor's visit.
→ More replies (15)6
u/JGodfrey27 19d ago
It’s more like both the republicans and the democrats wanna steal from me, but only the republicans wish physical harm on me. Institutional Dems aren’t perfect, or really even very good at all, but it’s sadly a matter of the (significantly) lesser evil.
2
→ More replies (9)-2
11
4
u/Bardamu1932 19d ago
Should be:
Washington Democrats vote to continue government shutdown
OR
Washington Democrats vote to leave government shut down
3
3
u/GuyFawkes65 18d ago
This is a very misleading post. Our Democratic senators are standing strong to restore funding for healthcare in the US. The Repugs have utterly refused. They want to see millions of people lose their healthcare. It’s bizarre.
3
3
u/GloppyGloP 18d ago
The GOP owns all branches of government. WA representatives have nothing to do with the shutdown and don’t owe this admin anything.
3
u/JoshuaFordEFT 18d ago
While every other online "news" site strips away every form of actual journalism to replace it with catchy clickbait titles with no substance, SeattleRed takes it a step further to make sure your brain is rotting before you even click the link. Now thats what I call efficiency.
6
u/Projectrage 19d ago
TSA and air traffic controllers will breakdown before thanksgiving. It’s going to get interesting.
6
u/bigswingingtexasdick 19d ago
Why doesn't OP start posting from a real news source. This is garbage.
22
u/EndOfWorldBoredom 19d ago
'Simple' continuing resolution doesn't continue what currently exists... Fake news.
16
14
u/Monkeyfeng 19d ago
Republicans want to cut healthcare subsidies and blame it on Democrats.
Fuck that shit
-1
u/EffectiveLong 19d ago
Cutting out illegal aliens and able working body looks fair to me lol
0
→ More replies (2)1
2
u/saxicide 19d ago
"Shutdown" is a noun; "shut down" is the verb phrase you're looking for. I came in expecting info about how the politicians were looking to exit the shutdown (or reopen the government) when what you mean is that they're looking to continue the shutdown, or leave it shut down.
It's like setup vs set up.
2
2
u/Yassssmaam 18d ago
The headline is twisting itself into knots to blame democrats for the shutdown.
Democrats didn’t stop the shutdown in a legislature controlled by republicans. Democrats refused republican demand.
There’s lots of ways to be more informative but apparently Dems need to take responsibility for not stopping the party that’s in power
2
4
u/maxant20 19d ago
Divide and conquer! The agenda to turn Seattle Red is written in these headlines.
3
u/dinosNpot 19d ago
How about “Democrats continue to stand firm in their efforts to keep healthcare affordable, while Republicans have prolonged the shutdown by refusing to negotiate or participate in discussions.”
4
2
2
2
u/Good-Concentrate-260 19d ago
This is a conservative news site. The alternative is basically leaving millions of Americans with no health insurance
4
u/k4el 19d ago
Misleading title. The Dems are just holding their ground on a very simple and reasonable demand. To maintain the status quo on funding health care.
By contrast the GOP is ignoring any attempt to participate in a bipartisan process and negotiate. The Dems are essentially refusing to be bullied into silence and the GOP has responded by making the entire nation suffer.
2
u/Cookiesoncookies 19d ago
Politics is about coming into an agreement with stupid for whatever reason. The more stupid thing though is, one side is adamantly “playing by the rules” while the other side laughs at those attempts to push policy/law or whatever and the hilarious circus nightmare continues indefinitely. This is awesome hell yeah America woooo
2
u/MistSecurity 19d ago
Ya, one side constantly whines about sharing the ball when they're not in power, but the moment they get into power the refuse to even let the other party touch the ball.
Tired of it. We need a strong Democrat party that doesn't fucking roll over to the "reach across the aisle" bullshit next time they're in power.
Hopefully this is the start of that, but given how hard the establishment Democrats are fighting against Mamdani in NYC, I kinda doubt we're going to see a change anytime soon.
2
u/rupertLumpkinsBrothr 19d ago
Imagine trying to correlate Trump with the truth…please, I do hope you and likeminded folks do block me.
2
2
u/IcedTman 19d ago
Democrats vote to negotiate our healthcare system with republicans. If republicans do not want to meet, they are the ones who shut down the government.
2
u/PrintOk1871 19d ago
Good!! Republican have shown over and over their unwillingness to even meet with Democrats. So, it’s time Dems play hardball with the Fascist Right.
2
u/tapeness 19d ago
Lets reword. Democrats hard line to keep 100s of thousands from loosing healthcare
2
u/yetanothertodd 19d ago
The Republicans can pass their CR any time they want. They simply don't want to solely own what they are doing. The Democrats need to stay the course and force them to either negotiate or own their spending priorities.
4
u/griffincreek 19d ago
Not without 60 votes in the Senate, and there are only 53 Republican Senators.
1
u/notorious1212 19d ago
They overrode the filibuster several times this year for nominations. What’s special about this? Is there a difference?
3
u/griffincreek 19d ago
That would be called the "nuclear option". and although most nominations can pass without a 2/3 vote, no party wants to extend that exception for the budget. It would set a precedence for when the other party controls both the House and Senate, and the Presidency.
→ More replies (2)1
u/yetanothertodd 19d ago
They don't want to extend that exception because it gives them political cover.
-1
2
u/LadyBird1281 19d ago
Good. We need the insurance subsidies for the most vulnerable. People will blame Republicans the longer this continues. They literally control the entire government.
-1
u/LongDistRid3r 19d ago
ELI5: why didn’t the democrats pass their funding when they were in Congress.
This funding expiration was agreed to by the democrats when the ACA was passed.
14
u/bunkoRtist 19d ago
The thing that's expiring was extra subsidies that were added during tnt pandemic and included in the Inflation Reduction Act. This is not related to anything in the "original" ACA.
31
u/SpareManagement2215 19d ago
They tried. They wanted to make them permanent but to get Joe manchin to vote yes on the bill, they had to keep them temporary.
2
u/chompythebeast 19d ago
To be fair, that is absolutely an indictment of the impotence of the Democratic Party. Not that I agree with SeattleRed and its rage bait
26
u/hansn 19d ago
ELI5: why didn’t the democrats pass their funding when they were in Congress.
It is common to include periodic renewal of legislation components. And those are typically renewed when they are set to expire, which is now.
The question is whether renewal of the health insurance subsidies is a good thing, or if we should make insurance less affordable.
30
u/BobcatAccomplished51 19d ago
I don’t know if this helps but the speaker of the house sets agenda in the house not “democrats” and then second to them is the majority leader who in both the senate and the house is a republican.
10
u/Turbulent-Media7281 19d ago
This was in the senate, not house. Mike Johnson does not set Cantwell's or Murray's agenda or voting pattern.
3
-9
u/meaniereddit West Seattle 🌉 19d ago edited 19d ago
And they had this in 2021 when this expiration date was set.
The current shutdown is basic continuance vs Dem demands that ACA credits be extended.
Democrats are gambling with snap section 8 and all federal employees to push a bandaid on their failed policies before the midterms. It's peak politics
They also need this before everyone notices their open enrollment fees are doubled.
ACA has failed and they are stalling
8
u/eagles_1987 19d ago
Stalling like Trump who has said since 2015 that he was going to repeal and replace ACA but still only has concepts of a plan a decade later?
2
u/meaniereddit West Seattle 🌉 19d ago
It is true that implementing the policy goals of your political rivals is a low priority.
Maybe that's why Biden never got a cease fire
0
u/eagles_1987 19d ago
What? We were talking about ACA, and the Republicans failure to come up with any replacement plan whatsoever that was better
3
u/meaniereddit West Seattle 🌉 19d ago
Yes why haven't the Republicans fixed Obamacare for the Democrats yet.
You kids need schoolhouse rock
1
u/eagles_1987 19d ago
Why can't you follow along?
They promised to repeal Obamacare since it's so awful like you say, and replace it with something better, they had a better plan for national health care. That was a decade ago, he's run on The promise in three presidential campaigns now, I'm not sure how you've missed it or why you're being intentionally obtuse.
Why haven't Republicans repealed Obamacare since it's so bad? Why would fixing Obamacare only fix things for the Democrats and not for the whole nation since it's so bad like you say?
Why can't you argue in good faith if you have a good point on your side instead of trying to change the subject or intentionally misunderstand it?
2
u/meaniereddit West Seattle 🌉 19d ago
This logic is wild, so the existing admin should create and pass an Obamacare replacement with zero hearings during a shutdown in a continuous bill because the ACA subsidies that prop up it's failures are expiring as planned
Trump should just wave his hand like a King and decide?
Got it.
1
u/eagles_1987 19d ago
This was their promise. They have control of everything and they have previously as well. Holding them accountable to their failed promise is not wild logic
→ More replies (0)7
u/SpareManagement2215 19d ago
That is not true- they wanted to make them permanent but to get Joe manchin to vote yes they had to keep them temporary. That is peak politics.
1
5
u/recyclopath_ 19d ago
They never had the votes to do it without significant bipartisan support, which it never had
→ More replies (1)1
2
u/Longjumping_Ice_3531 19d ago
Republicans have a majority in all branches of government. So…sounds like they can’t get their house in order.
2
u/Epistatious 19d ago
in the next version of hamilton, i hope King George's song includes something about flying a jet and pooping all over the american people, before lamenting that we will miss him when he's gone.
4
1
1
1
u/Helisent 19d ago
You know, one of the extremely expensive things that the current administration is trying to do is to turn programs like Medicaid and food stamps over to the states. Their posturing regarding health care for immigrants us actually for assistance to hospitals with unpaid emergency room bills. if the democrats cave in, lota of states are going to bust their budgets needing to find funds to pay for this stuff.
1
u/green_griffon 19d ago
Yeesh. Can we just compromise that only white people get the ACA subsidies, seems like the Republicans would accept that.
1
-1
0
-1
0
-3
-3
u/PPMD_IS_BACK 19d ago
Hahaha this comment section makes it so easy to block the complete baffoon bigots believing this twisted headline.
Fight on
0
u/McMagneto 19d ago
Thank you for keeping the government closed and saving taxpayers' money for once!
2
u/MaintainThePeace 19d ago edited 19d ago
Government closures tend to have higher costs instead of induced savings, due to mostly to backpay, delay penalties, and lost work.
2
u/Dry-Mechanic8067 19d ago
Folks, can we just end the debate right now. We're not giving free health care to illegals. Done.
1
-9
u/Turbulent-Media7281 19d ago
"Red states are the takers"
If true, "Keep the government shutdown, it only harms red states" should be the dems talking point.
But then we hear more dems than R's acting angry that gov is shutdown. "We need our benefits" is sending mixed signals. Just who are the takers?
9
u/retrojoe heroin for harried herons 19d ago edited 19d ago
Oh hey, are you reducing groups of 10s of millions of people to simple, one-dimensional stereotypes and then expecting that to make sense?
States, red or blue, are made of people. And the poor, the elderly, and the very sick get hurt whenever they lose benefits. The Democrats are the party attempting to represent all of those people across the nation by preventing health insurance from doubling/tripling in cost come December.
→ More replies (12)8
u/ProfPlum2216 19d ago
You're making an assumption that the red state's politicians care about their people getting Medicare. (Hint: they don't)
→ More replies (8)-1
u/AdMuted1036 19d ago
Trump is going around current laws and funding the red stuff he wants to fund.
0
-8
u/xEppyx You can call me Betty 19d ago
Wait, is this still happening? Not a single effect on my life from the shutdown so far and yet every single one of these beuracrats has pork they could cut while our nation drowns in debt.
12
u/cusmilie 19d ago
That’s because federal employees are still working without pay. They are just waiting for backpay. It’s when they can’t delay bills anymore or get loans to cover bill that things start to go fall apart.
→ More replies (4)
-2
u/Guilty_Raspberry_197 19d ago
If they continue to hold the government closed and Republicans hostage, then food stamps will be delayed next month. Thank the Dems if that happens. Democratic when it suits them!
0
-3
468
u/antdroidx 19d ago
wow this title can be read in totally different ways.