Here comes the Shutdown

[SportsFan68]

My EPA friend will go in at her usual time tomorrow and expects to be sent home about 8:30 a.m. along with everybody else at the Federal Center in Denver.

Just heard from her -- she's headed home as soon as she enters her timesheet. Says the system is overloaded with everybody trying to get it done at the same time.

[Bob Juch]

My EPA friend will go in at her usual time tomorrow and expects to be sent home about 8:30 a.m. along with everybody else at the Federal Center in Denver.

Just heard from her -- she's headed home as soon as she enters her timesheet. Says the system is overloaded with everybody trying to get it done at the same time.

I feel for her but hope this shutdown is so long a painful that no one will ever vote for a Republican again.

[earendel]

Oh, and for the record, I've been classified as an "essential" employee because I provide support for multiple offices. So I'm not being sent home. Of course there's no money to pay me, so I won't be getting a paycheck until this debacle is concluded. The ones being laid off can file for unemployment after five days, but those of us who are "essential" can't. They get to enjoy time off while we get to pick up the slack.

[Bob Juch]

Oh, and for the record, I've been classified as an "essential" employee because I provide support for multiple offices. So I'm not being sent home. Of course there's no money to pay me, so I won't be getting a paycheck until this debacle is concluded. The ones being laid off can file for unemployment after five days, but those of us who are "essential" can't. They get to enjoy time off while we get to pick up the slack.

How is it that Federal employees can file for state unemployment benefits? They haven't been paying into the fund.

[earendel]

Oh, and for the record, I've been classified as an "essential" employee because I provide support for multiple offices. So I'm not being sent home. Of course there's no money to pay me, so I won't be getting a paycheck until this debacle is concluded. The ones being laid off can file for unemployment after five days, but those of us who are "essential" can't. They get to enjoy time off while we get to pick up the slack.

How is it that Federal employees can file for state unemployment benefits? They haven't been paying into the fund.

I believe we do as part of the deductions taken out of our paychecks. I know that when elwing was laid off from the census bureau she was eligible for unemployment and took advantage of it.

[Bob Juch]

Oh, and for the record, I've been classified as an "essential" employee because I provide support for multiple offices. So I'm not being sent home. Of course there's no money to pay me, so I won't be getting a paycheck until this debacle is concluded. The ones being laid off can file for unemployment after five days, but those of us who are "essential" can't. They get to enjoy time off while we get to pick up the slack.

How is it that Federal employees can file for state unemployment benefits? They haven't been paying into the fund.

I believe we do as part of the deductions taken out of our paychecks. I know that when elwing was laid off from the census bureau she was eligible for unemployment and took advantage of it.

Oh, then I'm wrong. I don't recall paying that when I worked for the Postal Service. I'll ask the folks I work with when I get to work at 4:00. I'm a contractor so don't pay/get it.

[Buffacuse]

Mrs. Buff just got home...crying.

[vettech]

Oh, and for the record, I've been classified as an "essential" employee because I provide support for multiple offices. So I'm not being sent home. Of course there's no money to pay me, so I won't be getting a paycheck until this debacle is concluded. The ones being laid off can file for unemployment after five days, but those of us who are "essential" can't. They get to enjoy time off while we get to pick up the slack.

This is the boat I'm in. In addition to dealing with a grumpy public because even though we are open, we have been limited in the services we can provide. Although I'm grateful knowing that I will be paid eventually.

[vettech]

Mrs. Buff just got home...crying.

I'm sorry.

[Bob Juch]

Oh, and for the record, I've been classified as an "essential" employee because I provide support for multiple offices. So I'm not being sent home. Of course there's no money to pay me, so I won't be getting a paycheck until this debacle is concluded. The ones being laid off can file for unemployment after five days, but those of us who are "essential" can't. They get to enjoy time off while we get to pick up the slack.

This is the boat I'm in. In addition to dealing with a grumpy public because even though we are open, we have been limited in the services we can provide. Although I'm grateful knowing that I will be paid eventually.

It will take a bill to pass for back pay. Want to bet the Republicans play games with that too?

[danielh41]

It will take a bill to pass for back pay. Want to bet the Republicans play games with that too?

I know that this doesn't fit with the limited world view of Bob Juch, but both Republicans and Democrats are playing games with this. Democrats are not saints nor are Republicans devils. They are all politicians whose main concern is holding on to power. Which means that they are all playing games, and they are all to blame...

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

The vets at the WWII memorial just jumped the barricades, not exactly the bonus army but still pretty cool.

http://blog.gulflive.com/mississippi-pr ... at_wo.html

[Bob Juch]

It will take a bill to pass for back pay. Want to bet the Republicans play games with that too?

I know that this doesn't fit with the limited world view of Bob Juch, but both Republicans and Democrats are playing games with this. Democrats are not saints nor are Republicans devils. They are all politicians whose main concern is holding on to power. Which means that they are all playing games, and they are all to blame...

What games are the Democrats playing? They're just voting to continue funding the Affordable Healthcare Act which is already law.

[danielh41]

It will take a bill to pass for back pay. Want to bet the Republicans play games with that too?

I know that this doesn't fit with the limited world view of Bob Juch, but both Republicans and Democrats are playing games with this. Democrats are not saints nor are Republicans devils. They are all politicians whose main concern is holding on to power. Which means that they are all playing games, and they are all to blame...

What games are the Democrats playing? They're just voting to continue funding the Affordable Healthcare Act which is already law.

A law that shouldn't have been passed and that the country cannot afford. The passage of the law was a bunch of game playing...

[silverscreenselect]

A law that shouldn't have been passed and that the country cannot afford. The passage of the law was a bunch of game playing...

I agree that Obamacare was a bad and overly expensive bill. But it was passed and it's the law of the land.

And it became an issue in the 2012 election when one candidate specifically campaigned on a pledge to overturn it if he were elected. He lost and his party lost additional seats in Congress as well.

This is not the way to go about changing laws we don't like. And the American public thinks so too. Just released Quinnipiac Poll shows that the public opposes a government shutdown to block Obamacare by 72-22. Even 44% of Republicans oppose this. And independents oppose it 74-19. The public also opposes using the debt ceiling to block Obamacare (which will be the Republicans' next ploy) 64-27.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-an ... aseID=1958

[Bob Juch]

I know that this doesn't fit with the limited world view of Bob Juch, but both Republicans and Democrats are playing games with this. Democrats are not saints nor are Republicans devils. They are all politicians whose main concern is holding on to power. Which means that they are all playing games, and they are all to blame...

What games are the Democrats playing? They're just voting to continue funding the Affordable Healthcare Act which is already law.

A law that shouldn't have been passed and that the country cannot afford. The passage of the law was a bunch of game playing...

You have proof we can't afford it?

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

. But it was passed and it's the law of the land.

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

[flockofseagulls104]

A law that shouldn't have been passed and that the country cannot afford. The passage of the law was a bunch of game playing...

I agree that Obamacare was a bad and overly expensive bill. But it was passed and it's the law of the land.

And it became an issue in the 2012 election when one candidate specifically campaigned on a pledge to overturn it if he were elected. He lost and his party lost additional seats in Congress as well.

This is not the way to go about changing laws we don't like. And the American public thinks so too. Just released Quinnipiac Poll shows that the public opposes a government shutdown to block Obamacare by 72-22. Even 44% of Republicans oppose this. And independents oppose it 74-19. The public also opposes using the debt ceiling to block Obamacare (which will be the Republicans' next ploy) 64-27.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/institutes-an ... aseID=1958

Obamacare is not the law of the land. It seems to be whatever Obama says it is. He unilaterally (and illegally) decided to postpone the employer mandate of the 'law'. He exempts all his friends, again, unilaterally. The Constitution says Congress makes the laws, and the House of Representatives is part of Congress, last time I checked. but who cares about the Constitution? We are becoming a dictatorship.

The Senate (I mean Harry Reid) would not even pass another compromise bill sent by the 'intractable' House that funded Obamacare with the stipulation it apply to everyone, even themselves. Couldn't have that....

[macrae1234]

I disagree with and wonder what hat the numbers were pulled from

to this day 70% of the populace DON'T WANT OBAMACARE,

A recent CNBC poll found more Americans oppose ObamaCare than oppose the Affordable Care Act. But more Americans support ObamaCare than the Affordable Care Act.

Confused?

That would be understandable given that these are two names for the same law. CNBC polled two different groups, using "ObamaCare" for one and "Affordable Care Act" for the other. Forty-six percent of the group asked about "ObamaCare" opposed it. But only 37% of those asked about the health law opposed it.

Conversely, ObamaCare had higher support than the law. As CNBC put it, Obama's name "raises the positives and the negatives."

As a rational matter, this is nuts. An informed person should have the same opinions — positive or negative — about a piece of legislation regardless of what it's called. But because politics is so often driven by our attitudes toward specific personalities, for many Americans, their attitudes toward a monumentally significant piece of legislation are driven by something as petty as whether "Obama" is in the title.

But it's worse than that. The same poll found that 30% of respondents didn't know what the Affordable Care Act is — while "only" 12% didn't know what ObamaCare is.

This after years of relentless debate, and both a midterm and presidential election in which ObamaCare was one of the central issues.

[macrae1234]

Latest polls I read over 70 per cent of people oppose the shutdown tied to health care cuts
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-1 ... ealth-care
I can't vote but it sure doesn't look like a good re-election strategy to me

[earendel]

Latest polls I read over 70 per cent of people oppose the shutdown tied to health care cuts
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-1 ... ealth-care
I can't vote but it sure doesn't look like a good re-election strategy to me

From what I've read, it isn't a matter of getting re-elected - most of the Congresscritters are in "safe" districts, and are reflecting their constituents' opinions. It's more about fund-raising, particularly for presidential hopefuls, or those trying to fend off challengers from the right.

[Bob78164]

But it was one Congress in 2008 that passed the bill (hijacked the process) in question without a single Republican vote . . . .

It's not hijacking the process to pass a bill by a majority vote (a supermajority in the Senate) and then have it signed by the President. It is hijacking the process to refuse to bring to the floor a bill that would pass by a majority vote if the members of the House had the opportunity to vote on it. --Bob

[silverscreenselect]

I disagree with and wonder what hat the numbers were pulled from

to this day 70% of the populace DON'T WANT OBAMACARE,

A recent CNBC poll found more Americans oppose ObamaCare than oppose the Affordable Care Act. But more Americans support ObamaCare than the Affordable Care Act.

Also, in most of these polls, about 10% of respondents are opposed to Obamacare because it's not liberal enough. Needless to say, these people are not in favor of the Republican tactics whose goal is to go back to the pre-2009 status quo and then do nothing for the next umpteen years.

[silverscreenselect]

From what I've read, it isn't a matter of getting re-elected - most of the Congresscritters are in "safe" districts, and are reflecting their constituents' opinions. It's more about fund-raising, particularly for presidential hopefuls, or those trying to fend off challengers from the right.

That's based on some reasoning that may be flawed. One of my big peeves against Obamacare was the cost to the Democratic party in the 2010 elections. Republicans stacked the deck on redistricting, so that you have states like Pennsylvania, which has (narrowly) gone Democratic election after election (52-47 in 2012) with 5 Democratic and 13 Republican Congressmen. The only way Republicans can do that is to pack Democratic voters in a handful of districts, where their candidates are either unopposed or win with over 80% of the vote, while creating a large number of Republican districts that have 55-60% or so working margins.

Already, in some of these districts, like the 7th here in Georgia which covers a lot of Gwinnett County, there is a large inflow of Hispanics, which make the district a good bit better demographically for Democrats than it was in 2010 or 2012. Plus, if Republicans continue to alienate moderate and independent voters, they could lose some of these seats as well. Look what happened in the Missouri and Indiana Senate races last time.

There's still plenty of rock red districts, but there are a number that could be in play if the independent and marginally affiliated voters turn against the Republicans.

[SportsFan68]

I disagree with and wonder what hat the numbers were pulled from

to this day 70% of the populace DON'T WANT OBAMACARE,

A recent CNBC poll found more Americans oppose ObamaCare than oppose the Affordable Care Act. But more Americans support ObamaCare than the Affordable Care Act.

Also, in most of these polls, about 10% of respondents are opposed to Obamacare because it's not liberal enough. Needless to say, these people are not in favor of the Republican tactics whose goal is to go back to the pre-2009 status quo and then do nothing for the next umpteen years.

I had a pollster wish me a pleasant afternoon and then hang up the other day because I wouldn't tell him how old I was. Depending on how the question was worded, I suspect I would have landed in that 10% because I believe that we should have a single payer system, and I believe expanding Medicare to all is the best way to achieve it. Back in 2008, I disliked both Sens. Clinton and Obama's health care proposals. I dislike the Affordable Care Act because I think SSS is correct -- it's a bailout for private insurance companies, and resulting costs are much higher than they need to be.

I deplore Tea Party tactics which hurt individual families. Not only that, they force real Republican representatives into untenable positions based on the threat of a probably unwinnable primary. Voting patterns show that many of the people I consider real Republicans are quietly voting for Democrats. No, I don't have proof for that. It's just that in this area, Dems are winning races that based on the numbers, they shouldn't win.

These horrific fights are win-win for the Tea Partiers. Even if they lose, they win. People abhor being part of a fight, especially an internecine conflict which hurts them or a family member or a close friend. John Salazar lost Colorado's Third District when his opponent received fewer winning votes than the losing Republican candidate received in 2010.