Through what logic are Republicans able to say that the current American government shutdown is “the...
The President and other Republicans have been casting blame on the Democrats for being responsible for the current government shutdown.
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows).
united-states government-shutdown
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
|
show 3 more comments
The President and other Republicans have been casting blame on the Democrats for being responsible for the current government shutdown.
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows).
united-states government-shutdown
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
1
It's not the first time a funding gap has occurred when the president, the senate majority, and house majority, are of all of the same political party: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– Andrew Grimm
yesterday
1
Flagged as this question requires primarily speculation
– Aporter
10 hours ago
1
@Aporter I don’t think it requires speculation at all. The question boils down to what are the mechanics/nuances of the US governmental system that allow a party with majority in Congress and control of the executive branch to logically be able to blame the opposing party. Who is actually to blame is somewhat irrelevant. Alexander was able to answer that in their response.
– Trent the Gent
9 hours ago
3
@TrenttheGent If you consider Alexander's answer to answer your question, please edit the question so that it matches what he says. Because he doesn't actually address at all what you ask: what the Republicans's logic is that leads to their conclusion that the Democrats are to blame.
– curiousdannii
7 hours ago
1
Re blame and fault: Opponents of the wall regard steadfast opposition as less of a fault than it would it is both a credit and a duty -- i.e. something they're proud to oppose. For them it would be like asking *"whose fault is it that the US fails to officially re-institute slavery?"
– agc
5 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
The President and other Republicans have been casting blame on the Democrats for being responsible for the current government shutdown.
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows).
united-states government-shutdown
New contributor
The President and other Republicans have been casting blame on the Democrats for being responsible for the current government shutdown.
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows).
united-states government-shutdown
united-states government-shutdown
New contributor
New contributor
edited 9 hours ago
New contributor
asked yesterday
Trent the Gent
13727
13727
New contributor
New contributor
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
We're looking for long answers that provide some explanation and context. Don't just give a one-line answer; explain why your answer is right, ideally with citations. Answers that don't include explanations may be removed.
1
It's not the first time a funding gap has occurred when the president, the senate majority, and house majority, are of all of the same political party: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– Andrew Grimm
yesterday
1
Flagged as this question requires primarily speculation
– Aporter
10 hours ago
1
@Aporter I don’t think it requires speculation at all. The question boils down to what are the mechanics/nuances of the US governmental system that allow a party with majority in Congress and control of the executive branch to logically be able to blame the opposing party. Who is actually to blame is somewhat irrelevant. Alexander was able to answer that in their response.
– Trent the Gent
9 hours ago
3
@TrenttheGent If you consider Alexander's answer to answer your question, please edit the question so that it matches what he says. Because he doesn't actually address at all what you ask: what the Republicans's logic is that leads to their conclusion that the Democrats are to blame.
– curiousdannii
7 hours ago
1
Re blame and fault: Opponents of the wall regard steadfast opposition as less of a fault than it would it is both a credit and a duty -- i.e. something they're proud to oppose. For them it would be like asking *"whose fault is it that the US fails to officially re-institute slavery?"
– agc
5 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
1
It's not the first time a funding gap has occurred when the president, the senate majority, and house majority, are of all of the same political party: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– Andrew Grimm
yesterday
1
Flagged as this question requires primarily speculation
– Aporter
10 hours ago
1
@Aporter I don’t think it requires speculation at all. The question boils down to what are the mechanics/nuances of the US governmental system that allow a party with majority in Congress and control of the executive branch to logically be able to blame the opposing party. Who is actually to blame is somewhat irrelevant. Alexander was able to answer that in their response.
– Trent the Gent
9 hours ago
3
@TrenttheGent If you consider Alexander's answer to answer your question, please edit the question so that it matches what he says. Because he doesn't actually address at all what you ask: what the Republicans's logic is that leads to their conclusion that the Democrats are to blame.
– curiousdannii
7 hours ago
1
Re blame and fault: Opponents of the wall regard steadfast opposition as less of a fault than it would it is both a credit and a duty -- i.e. something they're proud to oppose. For them it would be like asking *"whose fault is it that the US fails to officially re-institute slavery?"
– agc
5 hours ago
1
1
It's not the first time a funding gap has occurred when the president, the senate majority, and house majority, are of all of the same political party: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– Andrew Grimm
yesterday
It's not the first time a funding gap has occurred when the president, the senate majority, and house majority, are of all of the same political party: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– Andrew Grimm
yesterday
1
1
Flagged as this question requires primarily speculation
– Aporter
10 hours ago
Flagged as this question requires primarily speculation
– Aporter
10 hours ago
1
1
@Aporter I don’t think it requires speculation at all. The question boils down to what are the mechanics/nuances of the US governmental system that allow a party with majority in Congress and control of the executive branch to logically be able to blame the opposing party. Who is actually to blame is somewhat irrelevant. Alexander was able to answer that in their response.
– Trent the Gent
9 hours ago
@Aporter I don’t think it requires speculation at all. The question boils down to what are the mechanics/nuances of the US governmental system that allow a party with majority in Congress and control of the executive branch to logically be able to blame the opposing party. Who is actually to blame is somewhat irrelevant. Alexander was able to answer that in their response.
– Trent the Gent
9 hours ago
3
3
@TrenttheGent If you consider Alexander's answer to answer your question, please edit the question so that it matches what he says. Because he doesn't actually address at all what you ask: what the Republicans's logic is that leads to their conclusion that the Democrats are to blame.
– curiousdannii
7 hours ago
@TrenttheGent If you consider Alexander's answer to answer your question, please edit the question so that it matches what he says. Because he doesn't actually address at all what you ask: what the Republicans's logic is that leads to their conclusion that the Democrats are to blame.
– curiousdannii
7 hours ago
1
1
Re blame and fault: Opponents of the wall regard steadfast opposition as less of a fault than it would it is both a credit and a duty -- i.e. something they're proud to oppose. For them it would be like asking *"whose fault is it that the US fails to officially re-institute slavery?"
– agc
5 hours ago
Re blame and fault: Opponents of the wall regard steadfast opposition as less of a fault than it would it is both a credit and a duty -- i.e. something they're proud to oppose. For them it would be like asking *"whose fault is it that the US fails to officially re-institute slavery?"
– agc
5 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
Rather than trying to address the claim of who is to blame, I will give you timeline of events and let you decide for yourself who deserves how much of the blame.
19th December, 2018:
Senate passes with a vote of 100-0 a bi-partisan short-term spending bill without funding for Trump's wall. Bill is expected to pass the House and be signed by the President. [1]
Fox and Friends, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter criticize Trump for "folding" on the wall. [2]
20th December, 2018:
The president informed us that he will not sign the bill that came up from the Senate last evening because of his legitimate concerns for border security.
-- Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R)
Instead of voting on the bill the Senate passed, the House with Paul Ryan (R) as Speaker passes a spending bill with $5 billion in border wall funding. Bill is not expected to pass the Senate, and ultimately did fail in the Senate, where 60 votes were needed and Republicans only had 51 seats. [3] [4]
3rd January, 2019:
The new House of Representatives with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker (Democrat) passes a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) blocks the bill in the Senate, saying he will not bring a bill to vote without the president's approval. [5]
NOTE: Please remember comments are for asking for more information or suggesting improvements. They are not for complaining about answers, or claiming that accepted answers somehow don't answer the question.
7
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
11
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
1
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
add a comment |
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows), but to me the logic seems that if Republicans had the ability to pass the funding measure and then didn’t, wouldn’t the shutdown be the Republicans fault?
I think there are a couple things: first, the new Democratic majority; and second, the filibuster/cloture process in the Senate.
Yesterday (3 Jan.) was the first day of the 116th Congress. As of yesterday, the Democrats have a majority in the House (235 to 199, one disputed seat) and the Republicans have a majority in the Senate (53 to 47). At this point and going forward, both parties bear responsibility for passing or failing to pass spending bills.
However, before yesterday, the Republicans had a 236 to 196 majority in the House (three vacant seats) and a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate. In December, the (Republican) House passed a spending bill with funding for the president's proposed border wall. The Senate unanimously passed an alternative short-term spending measure without border wall funding, which the president then threatened to veto. Following that, the Senate Majority Leader stated that he would not support (or presumably schedule a vote for) any bill that the president threatened to veto.
Also, almost all bills in the Senate require 60 senators to invoke "cloture" in order to end debate and vote. Bills that fail to receive cloture are "filibustered," and given that Senate Republicans had an extremely slim majority in the last Congress, invoking cloture against a united Democratic conference was quite tough. Even in the new Congress, invoking cloture will be tricky for polarizing legislation (e.g. anything dealing with "the wall"), albeit marginally easier for the Republicans than in the last Congress.
In my opinion, anyone who assigns blame or responsibility for the shutdown to one party exclusively is trying to spin the facts to fit a partisan or ideological narrative. How you assign blame depends on your personal beliefs, what you think about the majorities in Congress and what you think about the filibuster.
New contributor
4
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
4
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
2
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
2
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Passing a spending bill in the Senate requires bi-partisan cooperation because it requires overcoming a 60-vote requirement. The President demanded that any spending bill include a line for $5 billion (about 0.13% of the total yearly spending) for a border barrier (which he colloquially called a "wall").
The Republicans were willing to include the line for this spending. The Democrats were not. By this logic, the Democrats have a partial responsibility for the bill not passing.
Clearly they are not the only ones to blame. The President's unwillingness to give up on funding of "the wall" is to blame as well. But using the cloture rules to hold up a spending bill over a 0.13% spending line is the reason (or logic) for why the President is putting the failure to pass the spending bill at the Democrats' feet.
add a comment |
This isn't really that difficult: It's a typical standoff in which neither side wants to budge. Democrats could vote for the wall, but haven't. So, sure, it can be considered at least partially their fault. That's not to say Trump isn't to blame, either. But, if ending the shutdown were enough of a priority, then Democrats could simply vote for the money for the wall, and be done with it. If it's not, the standoff will continue.
New contributor
5
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
5
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
add a comment |
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
Answer: The Republicans' majority in the Senate isn't large enough.
In order to end debating a bill, 60 senators have to agree to start voting. Because the Republicans only held either 51 (just before the 2018 election) or 53 (after the 2018 election), the Democrats have enough votes to continue debating certain bills forever. This is known as 'filibusting' a bill.
As a result, the Republicans were not able to pass a bill that included the requested money for a border wall, even when they had majorities in both chambers of Congress.
8
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
1
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
3
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
3
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
2
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
This is the key point here... Pelosi in the House and Schumer in the Senate have staked out a position that Trump will get zero funding for the wall. For Pelosi and Schumer, any compromise is mud in their face. This is the detriment that the Democrat party leaders find themselves in.
Trump is ultimately in control by being able to veto the bill, and Pelosi and Schumer cannot possibly get 2/3 majority of House and Senate to pass in spite of the veto.
Trump would probably compromise with $2.5B (half) or even $1B to get things going, but again, Pelosi and Schumer say ZERO, NO FUNDING.
Pelosi then gets the Democrat House to pass a spending bill with ZERO funding, knowing that Trump will veto it. The Republicans in the Senate will not vote on it knowing the President will veto it. Pelosi producing any bill out of the House with NO FUNDING is the reason for a continued shutdown.
Pelosi's House of Reps passing a spending bill that has ZERO FUNDING, and the President has already stated will be vetoed, is DC swamp theater. This makes Democrats the guilty party in denying what the President wants, whos in charge of defending the country. A small compromise by Pelosi/Schumer for $1B for the wall would probably go over fine, however their existing staked position of ZERO FUNDING compels the Democrats to do whatever they can to prevent funding, thereby they being liable for creating the roadblock.
Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL. The Democrats are continuing to overplay a nonexistent hand, trying to prevent the Executive Branch from exercising its authority over border security. Poll cited: HarrisX poll, Dec24-26. 34% polled believe a wall SHOULD be built, 35% polled believed wall not built but BORDER SECURITY should be increased. And strangely, 31% seemed to believe in neither of those items, I'm guessing that's the open borders crowd.
For the government to get reopened, Pelosi will have to pass a spending bill with greater than ZERO FUNDING for a border wall. Then everybody can celebrate their marvelous victories while the state of the border is still so porous that DHS estimates greater than 10k/month of illegal border crossings.
New contributor
7
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
6
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
6
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
5
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
4
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
protected by Philipp♦ 20 hours ago
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Rather than trying to address the claim of who is to blame, I will give you timeline of events and let you decide for yourself who deserves how much of the blame.
19th December, 2018:
Senate passes with a vote of 100-0 a bi-partisan short-term spending bill without funding for Trump's wall. Bill is expected to pass the House and be signed by the President. [1]
Fox and Friends, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter criticize Trump for "folding" on the wall. [2]
20th December, 2018:
The president informed us that he will not sign the bill that came up from the Senate last evening because of his legitimate concerns for border security.
-- Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R)
Instead of voting on the bill the Senate passed, the House with Paul Ryan (R) as Speaker passes a spending bill with $5 billion in border wall funding. Bill is not expected to pass the Senate, and ultimately did fail in the Senate, where 60 votes were needed and Republicans only had 51 seats. [3] [4]
3rd January, 2019:
The new House of Representatives with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker (Democrat) passes a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) blocks the bill in the Senate, saying he will not bring a bill to vote without the president's approval. [5]
NOTE: Please remember comments are for asking for more information or suggesting improvements. They are not for complaining about answers, or claiming that accepted answers somehow don't answer the question.
7
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
11
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
1
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
add a comment |
Rather than trying to address the claim of who is to blame, I will give you timeline of events and let you decide for yourself who deserves how much of the blame.
19th December, 2018:
Senate passes with a vote of 100-0 a bi-partisan short-term spending bill without funding for Trump's wall. Bill is expected to pass the House and be signed by the President. [1]
Fox and Friends, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter criticize Trump for "folding" on the wall. [2]
20th December, 2018:
The president informed us that he will not sign the bill that came up from the Senate last evening because of his legitimate concerns for border security.
-- Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R)
Instead of voting on the bill the Senate passed, the House with Paul Ryan (R) as Speaker passes a spending bill with $5 billion in border wall funding. Bill is not expected to pass the Senate, and ultimately did fail in the Senate, where 60 votes were needed and Republicans only had 51 seats. [3] [4]
3rd January, 2019:
The new House of Representatives with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker (Democrat) passes a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) blocks the bill in the Senate, saying he will not bring a bill to vote without the president's approval. [5]
NOTE: Please remember comments are for asking for more information or suggesting improvements. They are not for complaining about answers, or claiming that accepted answers somehow don't answer the question.
7
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
11
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
1
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
add a comment |
Rather than trying to address the claim of who is to blame, I will give you timeline of events and let you decide for yourself who deserves how much of the blame.
19th December, 2018:
Senate passes with a vote of 100-0 a bi-partisan short-term spending bill without funding for Trump's wall. Bill is expected to pass the House and be signed by the President. [1]
Fox and Friends, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter criticize Trump for "folding" on the wall. [2]
20th December, 2018:
The president informed us that he will not sign the bill that came up from the Senate last evening because of his legitimate concerns for border security.
-- Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R)
Instead of voting on the bill the Senate passed, the House with Paul Ryan (R) as Speaker passes a spending bill with $5 billion in border wall funding. Bill is not expected to pass the Senate, and ultimately did fail in the Senate, where 60 votes were needed and Republicans only had 51 seats. [3] [4]
3rd January, 2019:
The new House of Representatives with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker (Democrat) passes a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) blocks the bill in the Senate, saying he will not bring a bill to vote without the president's approval. [5]
NOTE: Please remember comments are for asking for more information or suggesting improvements. They are not for complaining about answers, or claiming that accepted answers somehow don't answer the question.
Rather than trying to address the claim of who is to blame, I will give you timeline of events and let you decide for yourself who deserves how much of the blame.
19th December, 2018:
Senate passes with a vote of 100-0 a bi-partisan short-term spending bill without funding for Trump's wall. Bill is expected to pass the House and be signed by the President. [1]
Fox and Friends, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter criticize Trump for "folding" on the wall. [2]
20th December, 2018:
The president informed us that he will not sign the bill that came up from the Senate last evening because of his legitimate concerns for border security.
-- Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R)
Instead of voting on the bill the Senate passed, the House with Paul Ryan (R) as Speaker passes a spending bill with $5 billion in border wall funding. Bill is not expected to pass the Senate, and ultimately did fail in the Senate, where 60 votes were needed and Republicans only had 51 seats. [3] [4]
3rd January, 2019:
The new House of Representatives with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker (Democrat) passes a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R) blocks the bill in the Senate, saying he will not bring a bill to vote without the president's approval. [5]
NOTE: Please remember comments are for asking for more information or suggesting improvements. They are not for complaining about answers, or claiming that accepted answers somehow don't answer the question.
edited 5 hours ago
agc
5,2471551
5,2471551
answered yesterday
Alexander O'Mara
2,22611220
2,22611220
7
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
11
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
1
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
add a comment |
7
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
11
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
1
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
7
7
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
-1 because the question was "How could this be the Democrats' fault", and all this answer does is reiterate why it's Republicans' fault.
– Wes Sayeed
yesterday
11
11
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
@WesSayeed I didn't say that. It may well be the logical conclusion, but that's just the way it is sometimes. Sometimes the premise of the question is wrong, or mostly wrong as I would say in this case.
– Alexander O'Mara
yesterday
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
what does "a bill mirroring the one that passed the Senate" mean - is it identical or an new one?
– Sascha
22 hours ago
1
1
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
@Sascha It's technically a new one because the previous bill died when the previous Congress ended. My understanding is it is virtually identical though.
– Alexander O'Mara
14 hours ago
add a comment |
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows), but to me the logic seems that if Republicans had the ability to pass the funding measure and then didn’t, wouldn’t the shutdown be the Republicans fault?
I think there are a couple things: first, the new Democratic majority; and second, the filibuster/cloture process in the Senate.
Yesterday (3 Jan.) was the first day of the 116th Congress. As of yesterday, the Democrats have a majority in the House (235 to 199, one disputed seat) and the Republicans have a majority in the Senate (53 to 47). At this point and going forward, both parties bear responsibility for passing or failing to pass spending bills.
However, before yesterday, the Republicans had a 236 to 196 majority in the House (three vacant seats) and a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate. In December, the (Republican) House passed a spending bill with funding for the president's proposed border wall. The Senate unanimously passed an alternative short-term spending measure without border wall funding, which the president then threatened to veto. Following that, the Senate Majority Leader stated that he would not support (or presumably schedule a vote for) any bill that the president threatened to veto.
Also, almost all bills in the Senate require 60 senators to invoke "cloture" in order to end debate and vote. Bills that fail to receive cloture are "filibustered," and given that Senate Republicans had an extremely slim majority in the last Congress, invoking cloture against a united Democratic conference was quite tough. Even in the new Congress, invoking cloture will be tricky for polarizing legislation (e.g. anything dealing with "the wall"), albeit marginally easier for the Republicans than in the last Congress.
In my opinion, anyone who assigns blame or responsibility for the shutdown to one party exclusively is trying to spin the facts to fit a partisan or ideological narrative. How you assign blame depends on your personal beliefs, what you think about the majorities in Congress and what you think about the filibuster.
New contributor
4
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
4
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
2
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
2
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
add a comment |
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows), but to me the logic seems that if Republicans had the ability to pass the funding measure and then didn’t, wouldn’t the shutdown be the Republicans fault?
I think there are a couple things: first, the new Democratic majority; and second, the filibuster/cloture process in the Senate.
Yesterday (3 Jan.) was the first day of the 116th Congress. As of yesterday, the Democrats have a majority in the House (235 to 199, one disputed seat) and the Republicans have a majority in the Senate (53 to 47). At this point and going forward, both parties bear responsibility for passing or failing to pass spending bills.
However, before yesterday, the Republicans had a 236 to 196 majority in the House (three vacant seats) and a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate. In December, the (Republican) House passed a spending bill with funding for the president's proposed border wall. The Senate unanimously passed an alternative short-term spending measure without border wall funding, which the president then threatened to veto. Following that, the Senate Majority Leader stated that he would not support (or presumably schedule a vote for) any bill that the president threatened to veto.
Also, almost all bills in the Senate require 60 senators to invoke "cloture" in order to end debate and vote. Bills that fail to receive cloture are "filibustered," and given that Senate Republicans had an extremely slim majority in the last Congress, invoking cloture against a united Democratic conference was quite tough. Even in the new Congress, invoking cloture will be tricky for polarizing legislation (e.g. anything dealing with "the wall"), albeit marginally easier for the Republicans than in the last Congress.
In my opinion, anyone who assigns blame or responsibility for the shutdown to one party exclusively is trying to spin the facts to fit a partisan or ideological narrative. How you assign blame depends on your personal beliefs, what you think about the majorities in Congress and what you think about the filibuster.
New contributor
4
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
4
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
2
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
2
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
add a comment |
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows), but to me the logic seems that if Republicans had the ability to pass the funding measure and then didn’t, wouldn’t the shutdown be the Republicans fault?
I think there are a couple things: first, the new Democratic majority; and second, the filibuster/cloture process in the Senate.
Yesterday (3 Jan.) was the first day of the 116th Congress. As of yesterday, the Democrats have a majority in the House (235 to 199, one disputed seat) and the Republicans have a majority in the Senate (53 to 47). At this point and going forward, both parties bear responsibility for passing or failing to pass spending bills.
However, before yesterday, the Republicans had a 236 to 196 majority in the House (three vacant seats) and a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate. In December, the (Republican) House passed a spending bill with funding for the president's proposed border wall. The Senate unanimously passed an alternative short-term spending measure without border wall funding, which the president then threatened to veto. Following that, the Senate Majority Leader stated that he would not support (or presumably schedule a vote for) any bill that the president threatened to veto.
Also, almost all bills in the Senate require 60 senators to invoke "cloture" in order to end debate and vote. Bills that fail to receive cloture are "filibustered," and given that Senate Republicans had an extremely slim majority in the last Congress, invoking cloture against a united Democratic conference was quite tough. Even in the new Congress, invoking cloture will be tricky for polarizing legislation (e.g. anything dealing with "the wall"), albeit marginally easier for the Republicans than in the last Congress.
In my opinion, anyone who assigns blame or responsibility for the shutdown to one party exclusively is trying to spin the facts to fit a partisan or ideological narrative. How you assign blame depends on your personal beliefs, what you think about the majorities in Congress and what you think about the filibuster.
New contributor
I’m sure there is something that I am missing (certain vote percentages, loopholes, who knows), but to me the logic seems that if Republicans had the ability to pass the funding measure and then didn’t, wouldn’t the shutdown be the Republicans fault?
I think there are a couple things: first, the new Democratic majority; and second, the filibuster/cloture process in the Senate.
Yesterday (3 Jan.) was the first day of the 116th Congress. As of yesterday, the Democrats have a majority in the House (235 to 199, one disputed seat) and the Republicans have a majority in the Senate (53 to 47). At this point and going forward, both parties bear responsibility for passing or failing to pass spending bills.
However, before yesterday, the Republicans had a 236 to 196 majority in the House (three vacant seats) and a 51 to 49 majority in the Senate. In December, the (Republican) House passed a spending bill with funding for the president's proposed border wall. The Senate unanimously passed an alternative short-term spending measure without border wall funding, which the president then threatened to veto. Following that, the Senate Majority Leader stated that he would not support (or presumably schedule a vote for) any bill that the president threatened to veto.
Also, almost all bills in the Senate require 60 senators to invoke "cloture" in order to end debate and vote. Bills that fail to receive cloture are "filibustered," and given that Senate Republicans had an extremely slim majority in the last Congress, invoking cloture against a united Democratic conference was quite tough. Even in the new Congress, invoking cloture will be tricky for polarizing legislation (e.g. anything dealing with "the wall"), albeit marginally easier for the Republicans than in the last Congress.
In my opinion, anyone who assigns blame or responsibility for the shutdown to one party exclusively is trying to spin the facts to fit a partisan or ideological narrative. How you assign blame depends on your personal beliefs, what you think about the majorities in Congress and what you think about the filibuster.
New contributor
New contributor
answered yesterday
Andrew
62017
62017
New contributor
New contributor
4
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
4
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
2
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
2
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
add a comment |
4
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
4
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
2
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
2
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
4
4
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
"Senate Majority Leader would not support" is misleading. He has stated emphatically he will not allow any bill to be presented to the Senate without Presidential approval. Regarding responsibility for the shutdown, Trump has previously declared he would accept ("Proudly") the responsibility,
– BobE
yesterday
4
4
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
A fair minded answer. I would assert that Democrats in the Senate that would filibuster any bill that includes wall funding joining forces with a Democrat House that passes bills that do not include any funding against the President's wishes and veto power, makes it clear that a particular party, the Democrats, are clearly not interested in compromising to keep government running.
– enorl76
yesterday
2
2
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
@BobE Trump accepts the responsibility... and, as such, has brought the Republicans together. They have presented funding bills - and have been sitting at the table waiting for Democrats to start an honest attempt at compromise. The fact that the Democrats haven't is the basic premise of "The balls in their court and, as such, it's their fault" - it was his job to bring Republicans together... he did that (against Pelosi's promise he couldn't) and now it's their ball and their responsibility.
– WernerCD
14 hours ago
2
2
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
enorl76, why do only the President's wishes matter? The entire Senate already approved spending withoutbthe additional wall funding. Brought Republicans together by havimg the Senate and House pass different bills?
– Brooks Nelson
10 hours ago
add a comment |
Passing a spending bill in the Senate requires bi-partisan cooperation because it requires overcoming a 60-vote requirement. The President demanded that any spending bill include a line for $5 billion (about 0.13% of the total yearly spending) for a border barrier (which he colloquially called a "wall").
The Republicans were willing to include the line for this spending. The Democrats were not. By this logic, the Democrats have a partial responsibility for the bill not passing.
Clearly they are not the only ones to blame. The President's unwillingness to give up on funding of "the wall" is to blame as well. But using the cloture rules to hold up a spending bill over a 0.13% spending line is the reason (or logic) for why the President is putting the failure to pass the spending bill at the Democrats' feet.
add a comment |
Passing a spending bill in the Senate requires bi-partisan cooperation because it requires overcoming a 60-vote requirement. The President demanded that any spending bill include a line for $5 billion (about 0.13% of the total yearly spending) for a border barrier (which he colloquially called a "wall").
The Republicans were willing to include the line for this spending. The Democrats were not. By this logic, the Democrats have a partial responsibility for the bill not passing.
Clearly they are not the only ones to blame. The President's unwillingness to give up on funding of "the wall" is to blame as well. But using the cloture rules to hold up a spending bill over a 0.13% spending line is the reason (or logic) for why the President is putting the failure to pass the spending bill at the Democrats' feet.
add a comment |
Passing a spending bill in the Senate requires bi-partisan cooperation because it requires overcoming a 60-vote requirement. The President demanded that any spending bill include a line for $5 billion (about 0.13% of the total yearly spending) for a border barrier (which he colloquially called a "wall").
The Republicans were willing to include the line for this spending. The Democrats were not. By this logic, the Democrats have a partial responsibility for the bill not passing.
Clearly they are not the only ones to blame. The President's unwillingness to give up on funding of "the wall" is to blame as well. But using the cloture rules to hold up a spending bill over a 0.13% spending line is the reason (or logic) for why the President is putting the failure to pass the spending bill at the Democrats' feet.
Passing a spending bill in the Senate requires bi-partisan cooperation because it requires overcoming a 60-vote requirement. The President demanded that any spending bill include a line for $5 billion (about 0.13% of the total yearly spending) for a border barrier (which he colloquially called a "wall").
The Republicans were willing to include the line for this spending. The Democrats were not. By this logic, the Democrats have a partial responsibility for the bill not passing.
Clearly they are not the only ones to blame. The President's unwillingness to give up on funding of "the wall" is to blame as well. But using the cloture rules to hold up a spending bill over a 0.13% spending line is the reason (or logic) for why the President is putting the failure to pass the spending bill at the Democrats' feet.
edited 7 hours ago
answered 13 hours ago
grovkin
2,67321237
2,67321237
add a comment |
add a comment |
This isn't really that difficult: It's a typical standoff in which neither side wants to budge. Democrats could vote for the wall, but haven't. So, sure, it can be considered at least partially their fault. That's not to say Trump isn't to blame, either. But, if ending the shutdown were enough of a priority, then Democrats could simply vote for the money for the wall, and be done with it. If it's not, the standoff will continue.
New contributor
5
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
5
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
add a comment |
This isn't really that difficult: It's a typical standoff in which neither side wants to budge. Democrats could vote for the wall, but haven't. So, sure, it can be considered at least partially their fault. That's not to say Trump isn't to blame, either. But, if ending the shutdown were enough of a priority, then Democrats could simply vote for the money for the wall, and be done with it. If it's not, the standoff will continue.
New contributor
5
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
5
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
add a comment |
This isn't really that difficult: It's a typical standoff in which neither side wants to budge. Democrats could vote for the wall, but haven't. So, sure, it can be considered at least partially their fault. That's not to say Trump isn't to blame, either. But, if ending the shutdown were enough of a priority, then Democrats could simply vote for the money for the wall, and be done with it. If it's not, the standoff will continue.
New contributor
This isn't really that difficult: It's a typical standoff in which neither side wants to budge. Democrats could vote for the wall, but haven't. So, sure, it can be considered at least partially their fault. That's not to say Trump isn't to blame, either. But, if ending the shutdown were enough of a priority, then Democrats could simply vote for the money for the wall, and be done with it. If it's not, the standoff will continue.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 20 hours ago
mallen
551
551
New contributor
New contributor
5
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
5
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
add a comment |
5
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
5
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
5
5
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
The same logic says "the Republicans could accept no wall funding and be done with it".
– Ethan Bolker
19 hours ago
5
5
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
@EthanBolker : True, but the question asked about the arguments the Republicans are using.
– vsz
19 hours ago
add a comment |
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
Answer: The Republicans' majority in the Senate isn't large enough.
In order to end debating a bill, 60 senators have to agree to start voting. Because the Republicans only held either 51 (just before the 2018 election) or 53 (after the 2018 election), the Democrats have enough votes to continue debating certain bills forever. This is known as 'filibusting' a bill.
As a result, the Republicans were not able to pass a bill that included the requested money for a border wall, even when they had majorities in both chambers of Congress.
8
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
1
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
3
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
3
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
2
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
Answer: The Republicans' majority in the Senate isn't large enough.
In order to end debating a bill, 60 senators have to agree to start voting. Because the Republicans only held either 51 (just before the 2018 election) or 53 (after the 2018 election), the Democrats have enough votes to continue debating certain bills forever. This is known as 'filibusting' a bill.
As a result, the Republicans were not able to pass a bill that included the requested money for a border wall, even when they had majorities in both chambers of Congress.
8
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
1
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
3
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
3
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
2
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
Answer: The Republicans' majority in the Senate isn't large enough.
In order to end debating a bill, 60 senators have to agree to start voting. Because the Republicans only held either 51 (just before the 2018 election) or 53 (after the 2018 election), the Democrats have enough votes to continue debating certain bills forever. This is known as 'filibusting' a bill.
As a result, the Republicans were not able to pass a bill that included the requested money for a border wall, even when they had majorities in both chambers of Congress.
If Republicans have a majority in the House and the Senate, and also have control over the executive branch, how could it be possible that the Democrats are responsible for the shutdown?
Answer: The Republicans' majority in the Senate isn't large enough.
In order to end debating a bill, 60 senators have to agree to start voting. Because the Republicans only held either 51 (just before the 2018 election) or 53 (after the 2018 election), the Democrats have enough votes to continue debating certain bills forever. This is known as 'filibusting' a bill.
As a result, the Republicans were not able to pass a bill that included the requested money for a border wall, even when they had majorities in both chambers of Congress.
answered yesterday
Sjoerd
2,4091917
2,4091917
8
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
1
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
3
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
3
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
2
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
8
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
1
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
3
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
3
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
2
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
8
8
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
This answer doesn't seem to add anything not covered by the existing answers.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
1
1
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
@CrackpotCrocodile It's much shorter than the other ones. Listing which bills have passed doesn't answer why funding for a wall hasn't passed yet.
– Sjoerd
yesterday
3
3
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
The question isn't about the funding for the wall though, but the government shutdown.
– Lebbers
yesterday
3
3
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
@This question only shows how unbalanced this site is. Try to post an answer which only states "Trump is an idiot" without the slightest try to actually address the question, and it will get tons of upvotes. Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.
– vsz
22 hours ago
2
2
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
'Try to cite arguments in favor of a Republican position, no matter how well sourced, it will be reported as "not an answer". Your account might even be suspended for a week.' - No one besides the most upvoted answer here has provided sources or citations. @Sjoerd I can't downvote answers.
– Lebbers
18 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
This is the key point here... Pelosi in the House and Schumer in the Senate have staked out a position that Trump will get zero funding for the wall. For Pelosi and Schumer, any compromise is mud in their face. This is the detriment that the Democrat party leaders find themselves in.
Trump is ultimately in control by being able to veto the bill, and Pelosi and Schumer cannot possibly get 2/3 majority of House and Senate to pass in spite of the veto.
Trump would probably compromise with $2.5B (half) or even $1B to get things going, but again, Pelosi and Schumer say ZERO, NO FUNDING.
Pelosi then gets the Democrat House to pass a spending bill with ZERO funding, knowing that Trump will veto it. The Republicans in the Senate will not vote on it knowing the President will veto it. Pelosi producing any bill out of the House with NO FUNDING is the reason for a continued shutdown.
Pelosi's House of Reps passing a spending bill that has ZERO FUNDING, and the President has already stated will be vetoed, is DC swamp theater. This makes Democrats the guilty party in denying what the President wants, whos in charge of defending the country. A small compromise by Pelosi/Schumer for $1B for the wall would probably go over fine, however their existing staked position of ZERO FUNDING compels the Democrats to do whatever they can to prevent funding, thereby they being liable for creating the roadblock.
Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL. The Democrats are continuing to overplay a nonexistent hand, trying to prevent the Executive Branch from exercising its authority over border security. Poll cited: HarrisX poll, Dec24-26. 34% polled believe a wall SHOULD be built, 35% polled believed wall not built but BORDER SECURITY should be increased. And strangely, 31% seemed to believe in neither of those items, I'm guessing that's the open borders crowd.
For the government to get reopened, Pelosi will have to pass a spending bill with greater than ZERO FUNDING for a border wall. Then everybody can celebrate their marvelous victories while the state of the border is still so porous that DHS estimates greater than 10k/month of illegal border crossings.
New contributor
7
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
6
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
6
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
5
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
4
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
This is the key point here... Pelosi in the House and Schumer in the Senate have staked out a position that Trump will get zero funding for the wall. For Pelosi and Schumer, any compromise is mud in their face. This is the detriment that the Democrat party leaders find themselves in.
Trump is ultimately in control by being able to veto the bill, and Pelosi and Schumer cannot possibly get 2/3 majority of House and Senate to pass in spite of the veto.
Trump would probably compromise with $2.5B (half) or even $1B to get things going, but again, Pelosi and Schumer say ZERO, NO FUNDING.
Pelosi then gets the Democrat House to pass a spending bill with ZERO funding, knowing that Trump will veto it. The Republicans in the Senate will not vote on it knowing the President will veto it. Pelosi producing any bill out of the House with NO FUNDING is the reason for a continued shutdown.
Pelosi's House of Reps passing a spending bill that has ZERO FUNDING, and the President has already stated will be vetoed, is DC swamp theater. This makes Democrats the guilty party in denying what the President wants, whos in charge of defending the country. A small compromise by Pelosi/Schumer for $1B for the wall would probably go over fine, however their existing staked position of ZERO FUNDING compels the Democrats to do whatever they can to prevent funding, thereby they being liable for creating the roadblock.
Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL. The Democrats are continuing to overplay a nonexistent hand, trying to prevent the Executive Branch from exercising its authority over border security. Poll cited: HarrisX poll, Dec24-26. 34% polled believe a wall SHOULD be built, 35% polled believed wall not built but BORDER SECURITY should be increased. And strangely, 31% seemed to believe in neither of those items, I'm guessing that's the open borders crowd.
For the government to get reopened, Pelosi will have to pass a spending bill with greater than ZERO FUNDING for a border wall. Then everybody can celebrate their marvelous victories while the state of the border is still so porous that DHS estimates greater than 10k/month of illegal border crossings.
New contributor
7
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
6
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
6
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
5
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
4
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
This is the key point here... Pelosi in the House and Schumer in the Senate have staked out a position that Trump will get zero funding for the wall. For Pelosi and Schumer, any compromise is mud in their face. This is the detriment that the Democrat party leaders find themselves in.
Trump is ultimately in control by being able to veto the bill, and Pelosi and Schumer cannot possibly get 2/3 majority of House and Senate to pass in spite of the veto.
Trump would probably compromise with $2.5B (half) or even $1B to get things going, but again, Pelosi and Schumer say ZERO, NO FUNDING.
Pelosi then gets the Democrat House to pass a spending bill with ZERO funding, knowing that Trump will veto it. The Republicans in the Senate will not vote on it knowing the President will veto it. Pelosi producing any bill out of the House with NO FUNDING is the reason for a continued shutdown.
Pelosi's House of Reps passing a spending bill that has ZERO FUNDING, and the President has already stated will be vetoed, is DC swamp theater. This makes Democrats the guilty party in denying what the President wants, whos in charge of defending the country. A small compromise by Pelosi/Schumer for $1B for the wall would probably go over fine, however their existing staked position of ZERO FUNDING compels the Democrats to do whatever they can to prevent funding, thereby they being liable for creating the roadblock.
Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL. The Democrats are continuing to overplay a nonexistent hand, trying to prevent the Executive Branch from exercising its authority over border security. Poll cited: HarrisX poll, Dec24-26. 34% polled believe a wall SHOULD be built, 35% polled believed wall not built but BORDER SECURITY should be increased. And strangely, 31% seemed to believe in neither of those items, I'm guessing that's the open borders crowd.
For the government to get reopened, Pelosi will have to pass a spending bill with greater than ZERO FUNDING for a border wall. Then everybody can celebrate their marvelous victories while the state of the border is still so porous that DHS estimates greater than 10k/month of illegal border crossings.
New contributor
This is the key point here... Pelosi in the House and Schumer in the Senate have staked out a position that Trump will get zero funding for the wall. For Pelosi and Schumer, any compromise is mud in their face. This is the detriment that the Democrat party leaders find themselves in.
Trump is ultimately in control by being able to veto the bill, and Pelosi and Schumer cannot possibly get 2/3 majority of House and Senate to pass in spite of the veto.
Trump would probably compromise with $2.5B (half) or even $1B to get things going, but again, Pelosi and Schumer say ZERO, NO FUNDING.
Pelosi then gets the Democrat House to pass a spending bill with ZERO funding, knowing that Trump will veto it. The Republicans in the Senate will not vote on it knowing the President will veto it. Pelosi producing any bill out of the House with NO FUNDING is the reason for a continued shutdown.
Pelosi's House of Reps passing a spending bill that has ZERO FUNDING, and the President has already stated will be vetoed, is DC swamp theater. This makes Democrats the guilty party in denying what the President wants, whos in charge of defending the country. A small compromise by Pelosi/Schumer for $1B for the wall would probably go over fine, however their existing staked position of ZERO FUNDING compels the Democrats to do whatever they can to prevent funding, thereby they being liable for creating the roadblock.
Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL. The Democrats are continuing to overplay a nonexistent hand, trying to prevent the Executive Branch from exercising its authority over border security. Poll cited: HarrisX poll, Dec24-26. 34% polled believe a wall SHOULD be built, 35% polled believed wall not built but BORDER SECURITY should be increased. And strangely, 31% seemed to believe in neither of those items, I'm guessing that's the open borders crowd.
For the government to get reopened, Pelosi will have to pass a spending bill with greater than ZERO FUNDING for a border wall. Then everybody can celebrate their marvelous victories while the state of the border is still so porous that DHS estimates greater than 10k/month of illegal border crossings.
New contributor
edited 13 hours ago
New contributor
answered yesterday
enorl76
1194
1194
New contributor
New contributor
7
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
6
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
6
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
5
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
4
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
7
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
6
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
6
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
5
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
4
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
7
7
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
Down voted because no citations, no sources. Your opinion is not an answer.
– BobE
yesterday
6
6
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
"Not to mention at least 60% of people polled WANT BETTER BORDER SECURITY, with half that saying BUILD A WALL" - this source with a collection of polls shows otherwise: pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
– Lebbers
yesterday
6
6
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
You say the President is in charge of defending the country, but you forget the House of Representatives is in charge of making sure taxpayer money is spent appropriately. If they decide that spending money on medieval tech like walls is a waste of money, it's their duty to refuse.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
5
5
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
You also forget how many times Democrats have tried compromising with Trump on border wall funding to avoid shutdowns in the past, but it was Trump who refused to budge on the dollar amount.
– CrackpotCrocodile
yesterday
4
4
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
@BobE so by the same standard did you down vote Kayden Rule's answer too?
– Aporter
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
protected by Philipp♦ 20 hours ago
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
1
It's not the first time a funding gap has occurred when the president, the senate majority, and house majority, are of all of the same political party: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
– Andrew Grimm
yesterday
1
Flagged as this question requires primarily speculation
– Aporter
10 hours ago
1
@Aporter I don’t think it requires speculation at all. The question boils down to what are the mechanics/nuances of the US governmental system that allow a party with majority in Congress and control of the executive branch to logically be able to blame the opposing party. Who is actually to blame is somewhat irrelevant. Alexander was able to answer that in their response.
– Trent the Gent
9 hours ago
3
@TrenttheGent If you consider Alexander's answer to answer your question, please edit the question so that it matches what he says. Because he doesn't actually address at all what you ask: what the Republicans's logic is that leads to their conclusion that the Democrats are to blame.
– curiousdannii
7 hours ago
1
Re blame and fault: Opponents of the wall regard steadfast opposition as less of a fault than it would it is both a credit and a duty -- i.e. something they're proud to oppose. For them it would be like asking *"whose fault is it that the US fails to officially re-institute slavery?"
– agc
5 hours ago