15 ms·
US government shuts down after Senate fails to pass last-ditch funding plan
- andsoitis 1y agoWhat does it mean for air travel?
- tamaker 1y agoPissed, unpaid TSA workers. Those who choose to show up to work. There WILL be impacts, most certainly.
- andsoitis 1y agoSafe to fly?
- bix6 1y agoATC is essential but they don’t get paid
- cosmicgadget 1y agoThey get back pay when the shutdown ends.
- bix6 1y agoYup and in the meantime they can buy their groceries with…
- gizmo686 1y agoA lot of banks/credit unions offer 0% loans to federal employees during government shutdowns. Some of them even offer this to customers who join after the shutdown began. Granted, it is weird to think about living in a country where this is a finanical product that so many institutions just have. Even without that, the shutdown actually needs to last a while before it actually becomes a problem for forloughed workers. Despite the shutdown, the October 1 paychecks (covering work done between September 7 and September 20) will still go out, as they have long since been sent to the payment processors. The October 15 paychecks (covering September 21 - October 4) should go out with a slightly reduced amount the unpaid 4 days during the shutdown. This would require the agency in question to properly follow shutdown protocols and submit timecards/payroll data to the processors prior to the shutdown. Since this is not the routine process, I imagine some mistakes will be made here, so some government workers will probably miss the October 15 paycheck. Others may face hardship from the reduced payment; but even people living paycheck to paycheck typically stretch the paycheck out across the pay period, so will be able to get through most of the period on the reduced check (and can probably defer/reduce some spending). Major payroll lapses will not kick in until the October 29 paycheck. If we reach that point, this would be the second longest shutdown in history [0]. Even then, most Americans have an existing line of credit that offers 0% interest loans for between 30 and 60 days depending on when they are in the billing cycle [1]. [0] Not that I would be too suprised by this. The longest shutdown occured under President Trump, while the republicans controlled the Senate; and had controll of the House for the first part of the shutdown. [1] Except for those who have a revolving balance, in which case and additional spending starts accruing interest immedietly; and any delay in paying down the existing balance also incurs interest. And, when these loans do gather interest, it is at a quite high rate.
- achenet 1y ago> Granted, it is weird to think about living in a country where this is a finanical product that so many institutions just have. I suppose it's like working for a company with a really weird build or CI/CD process that breaks regularly, to the point where many devs in the company have a prepared "the build process broke again" workaround script ready. People are generally pretty intelligent, au least until they get into politics
- johnnyanmac 1y agoI'm really tired of band-aiding solutions and not properly addressing the core issues behind the broken everything. Broken windows, and we're running out of duct tape.
- jachee 1y agoYou don't think people with the planning skills and intelligence to real-time coordinate and sequence air traffic have the skills to foresee an impending event and start planning, coordinating and sequencing their personal responses to that event?
- bix6 1y agoDo you think people with a super stressful job should get more stress added to their lives? How many Americans live paycheck to paycheck?
- cosmicgadget 1y agoYou seem to be interpreting assertions of fact as some sort of approval for the current state of things. The commenter above is saying that ATCs by and large are probably not living paycheck to paycheck. He isn't saying that the shutdown is super neat. Further up, I was clarifying that ATCs will get paid once the shutdown ends, which is a world of difference from the other way to interpret "they aren't getting paid". Likewise I am not making a value judgement about the situation, I am trying to be helpful. Not everything is an argument.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago>You seem to be interpreting assertions of fact as some sort of approval for the current state of things. You seem to be ignoring the human element of the situation in lieu of pushing the logistics of it. Something the GP was directly combatting. No, the airlines aren't shutting down. We're further weakening the stability that will lead to the next major crash, though. Be it literal or otherwise. Life isn't a spreadsheet
- cosmicgadget 1y agoI'm not really a spreadsheet guy.
- 1y ago
- Terr_ 1y ago> There WILL be impacts, most certainly. Amusingly—or perhaps worryingly—I can't help but "hear" that as Bob Page saying "Oh yes, most certainly" in the Deus Ex intro cutscene. [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feY5KhdXsUQ&t=16s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feY5KhdXsUQ&t=16s
- vizzier 1y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmOCsiZgAbg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmOCsiZgAbg
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- bix6 1y ago> The US Department of Housing and Urban Development has added a message to the top of its website blaming the looming government shutdown on the "radical left". That’s rich coming from a department that has intentionally withheld money from our most vulnerable people this year.
- decremental 1y ago[dead]
- suzdude 1y agoIt's a Hatch Act Violation. If anyone in the DOJ cared to enforce it.
- rockercoaster 1y agoTons of federal employees (maybe all?) received an official email blaming Democrats for the shutdown, too. Also a violation.
- ModernMech 1y agoAnd actually enforcing it would be branded as "abusing government for political persecution". It's going to take someone with steel will to actually prosecute all of this crime.
- bix6 1y agoLeroy Jenkins!
- johnnyanmac 1y agoFrom our most vulnerable people. And are educated populace. And the media. And even our soldiers of you look into how these deployments work. Can't generate money, only lose it then refuse to allocate what we have left.
- kachapopopow 1y ago"Democrats shut down the government" Republicans hold the majority... hello?
- bix6 1y agoRepublicans can’t Math, boss.
- prawn 1y agoIn various other countries, if you can't pass a budget, your governance is in question to the point that you face a new election. i.e., it is on you to negotiate more flexibly to avoid this.
- sturadnidge 1y agoHow many of said countries require more than a simple majority to pass a budget though? To my knowledge the US is quite the exception in that it requires a _special_ majority for such things. A simple majority could be challenging if the government is formed via coalition, but if you have any examples where 1) a single party formed government and 2) a simple majority was the only requirement to pass a budget and 3) a budget failed to pass… then enlighten me by all means!
- timeon 1y agoSingle party forming government is already questionable democracy. Edit: At least there is required more than simple majority for some things - as there needs to be compromise (consensus in society). But we see now the flaw that ruling party does not care about compromises.
- throwup238 1y agoIsn’t the super majority for getting over filibusters in the Senate? The catch is that it’s a Senate rule and the Senate sets is own rules via simple majority. There’s nothing really stopping a government with simple majority control across all branches from doing away with the filibuster and ramming the budget through except internal party politics.
- abnercoimbre 1y agoDoes congress get paid during this time?
- bix6 1y agoBut of course! And you can bet they made some spicy trades beforehand.
- scrubs 1y agoYou gotta it: congress always always takes theirs first and off the top.
- Braxton1980 1y agoWhy do you think this matters when most of them have significant amounts of money and investments.
- andsoitis 1y agoHow long do government shutdowns last? How often do they happen? https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/longest-government-shutdown-us-history-president-administration-rcna234766 https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/longest-government-shu...
- andsoitis 1y agoHow long do government shutdowns last? How often do they happen? https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/longest-government-shutdown-us-history-president-administration-rcna234766 https://www.nbcnews.com/data-graphics/longest-government-shu...
- topspin 1y ago> How long do government shutdowns last? That can't be predicted. One side or the other knuckles under at some point, but there is no schedule. > How often do they happen? A couple times every decade. Often enough that it one can see trends. The longest is also the most recent: 35 days in 2018. That was Trump's first term. Obama had one as well. They've been trending longer since the 1980's.
- Jimmc414 1y agoWe can't swear in the new senator from Arizona who coincidentally has the tie breaking vote to force the release of the Epstein files.
- hdgvhicv 1y agoOk, so this list is released. Let’s say it has photos of Trump with underage sex trafficking victims. Then what? Do you really think that would be enough to change anything?
- jackvalentine 1y agoI’m not sure what you’re angling to have someone else say for you. Could you just say it?
- gryfft 1y agoIf releasing the Epstein files would accomplish nothing, why is preventing their release the indisputable highest priority of the Republican party?
- rkomorn 1y agoI'd say the risk for republicans is more looking like they lost something to democrats (or worse, caved) than the actual content of the files.
- gryfft 1y agoThen you simply have not been paying attention. The Republican base was full throatedly calling for the release of the files mere months ago. They were sitting "on Bondi's desk." Releasing them then would not be seen as caving. Your argument is nonsensical.
- rkomorn 1y agoMy take is democrats called the republicans' "bluff" (because republicans never actually intended to release everything) and backed them into a corner of having to actively oppose the release because democrats don't. Now, even if those files end up being a nothingburger (because republicans will just shrug off whatever makes them look bad), it'll be on republicans if they let the release happen. My main point is: republicans aren't opposing the release because "they're on the list", they're opposing it because it'll look like a loss if the release happens.
- treetalker 1y ago[flagged]
- scrubs 1y agoAgree! Talk about bold leadership ... talk about classing this dump up ... /s
- AfterHIA 1y ago[flagged]
- csomar 1y agoYou should look up on how coups work. Unless they want to end up like the south korean president, they should size up the military. That’s what it is about and if you are working on a coup, it’s worth every penny especially that the public is the one paying for it.
- johnnyanmac 1y agoWhat? You do know "sizing up the military" is exactly why the South Korean president was ousted, right? He tried to declare martial law and parliament completely shut that down. Not exactly the thing you want to announce when you've had hostile neighbors for 70 years. Let them dig their own grave if true, but I'm confused what yirre getting at.
- csomar 1y agoSizing up the military is going/inviting the military leaders multiple times to figure out if they will stand with you in the case of a coup. That’s not what the South Korean president did. Many people here confuse a coup to a direct seizing of power and the president declaring himself a dictator. A coup is fast but gradual seizing of power that starts by seizing one element (ie: law enforcement of a state, a senator, an official, etc.) gradually to seizing the courts.
- LostMyLogin 1y agoThe official White House website now lists a banner reading “Democrats Have Shut Down the Government” with a timer. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/ I fear this may longer than I originally suspected.
- Terr_ 1y agoCombined with the mass e-mails Trump appointees sent out within different departments, these are crimes under the Hatch Act, since they are using government resources for nakedly partisan purposes.
- buckle8017 1y ago[flagged]
- calgoo 1y agoStop with these what about isms. People have done bad things all the time, that does not mean we need to allow the current group of people to continue destroying the world.
- Terr_ 1y agoNo, the law is called the "Affordable Care Act" precisely to avoid making it partisan with an active politician's name getting free advertising on the side. If was Republicans who spent years promoting that unofficial nickname of "Obamacare" as an insult! > [2011] Arguing that Obamacare is at this point a derogatory term, House Democrats want to ban the term from mailers sent from Congressional offices [saying it] violates the rules against sending mailers for "personal, partisan, or political reasons." You are literally blaming the victim for something the other side did. __________ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2011/10/house-democrats-want-republicans-stop-saying-obamacare/336283/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2011/10/house-democrats...
- johnnyanmac 1y ago>It was Republicans who spent years promoting that unofficial nickname of "Obamacare" as an insult! Thank you. It was picked up by many of the public as a popular term for a popular president. But I don't think I've ever heard any Democrat in policy call it Obamacare. Closest we get is maybe "Healthcare reform under Obama". The original purpose of the term was always to stroke the flames of people who people who hated Obama. So that they associate Obama with "giving handouts".
- taeric 1y agoHow in the happy fuck is this getting blamed on the minority party!?
- flanked-evergl 1y ago[flagged]
- timeon 1y agoFascinating how you chose to believe those lies.
- flanked-evergl 1y ago[flagged]
- addandsubtract 1y ago"If only Trump's victims agreed to sleeping with him, it wouldn't be rape. How could they do this?!"
- deafpolygon 1y agoBut say it often enough, and it becomes "truth". At least, that's what people believe.
- flanked-evergl 1y agoName a single thing in my comment that is not entirely factual.
- bastawhiz 1y agoThey didn't even get all the Republicans to support it, so that's false on its face.
- 1y ago
- mugivarra69 1y ago[dead]
- JdeBP 1y agoHere's a collection for dang/tomhow, as this is (as it always has in the past) going to collect duplicates as everyone posts their own news source's version: * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45423880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45423880 (NPR before the shutdown) * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45434179 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45434179 (The Guardian, politically biased headline) * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45434441 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45434441 (Reuters) * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45434146 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45434146 (BBC News)
- Terr_ 1y agoI want to point out that that a new and dangerous kind of "shutdown" was already happening before today, just in a patchy partisan manner. [0][1] In a nutshell: 1. Democrats and Republicans reach a typical legislative compromise with enough votes to pass a law, declaring that federal government shall do both [A] and [B]. 2. President Trump: "Meh, I just don't wanna do [B], nobody do [B] or else you're fired." 3. Republican legislators: "Sure, we didn't want [B] anyway, we'll sit back and let Trump break the law without impeaching him. We'll can spend that money for something else we like later." So... what's the point of Democrats compromising on a package of budget laws, when the Republican party keeps conspiring to break the very laws they agreed-to but don't like? _____________________ [0] https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/new-data-show-trump-administrations-illegal-targeted-withholding-of-funds https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/new-data-show-t... [1] https://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action/letters/the-trump-administrations-attacks-on-federal-funding-have-escalated-over-first-100-days/ https://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action/letters/the-t...
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoThe Democratic party has realized that negotiating doesn't get them anything. Evenn if the Republicans agree to their demands, they won't actually follow through.
- parineum 1y agoAnd the solution is obviously to give Trump more power by allowing him to legally decide which parts of the government are essential.
- actionfromafar 1y agoThis is the most insightful comment yet here.
- HaZeust 1y agoThis is a great point, and it's something that the Founding Fathers really just kicked the can down the road for succeeding generations to find out. The executive doing so is technically in violation of the Take Care Clause ("shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"), and SOME judicial proceedings since then have found that the Executive can't use under-spending to deny or delay a congressional act or program (Train v. City of New York, 1975) - but it's still something that's up in the air if we have a complicit Congress AND judiciary. But then again, with a complicit Congress and Judiciary - what ISN'T in the air is a shorter list.
- Almondsetat 1y agoIf you have to use the "this hasn't happened since X" formulation for dramatic effect, at least do it when the time scale is actually impressive. Last time it happened was 7 years ago? That's not even 2 presidencies
- xboxnolifes 1y agoHas it already been 7 years? It feels like just last year.
- JohnTHaller 1y agoIt happened twice during Trump's last presidency. Didn't happen under Biden.
- protocolture 1y agoFinally. That was a terrible government. Hopefully its replaced with something even halfway servicable.
- flanked-evergl 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoHate to break it to you, but: Government shutdowns don't result in a replacement government. When it's over, the same one comes back. Worse (if you think the government is terrible), parts of it continue even during the shutdown.
- protocolture 1y agoShut the rest of it down.
- lynx97 1y agoshuts dowm?
- jandrewrogers 1y agoAs someone who actually worked for the Federal government when it shutdown in the past, people are exaggerating the implications for narrative purposes. This happens semi-routinely, there is a boring reality that goes along with it. The people worst off are Federal contractors. They are effectively unemployed during these periods. Many actual employees, like me in previous shutdowns, are essentially on irregular paid time off. In theory it is unpaid, but it is always retroactively paid in practice and everyone knows this. People that are “critical” kind of get a raw deal because they still have to work while people deemed less essential don’t have to work. It is unfortunate that it happens but I wouldn’t get overly caught up in the theater of it all.
- losteric 1y ago> In theory it is unpaid, but it is always retroactively paid in practice and everyone knows this. Why only in theory? Why does it get paid back in practice?
- shuckles 1y agoBecause everyone involved is in on the grift and the money comes from the taxpayer's budget.
- tjohns 1y agoHistorically, congress always passed a one-time bill to retroactively pay the federal employees after each shutdown. Because it turns out not paying your workers is extremely unpopular, especially if you want to retain them as workers in the future. Most people (federal workers included) are living paycheck-to-paycheck and can't financially weather a furlough - they still need to pay rent. The federal government would quickly find itself unable to attract employees given how often shutdowns occur. After 2019, congress passed a law that guaranteed back-pay for future shutdowns: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Employee_Fair_Treatment_Act_of_2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Employee_Fair_Treat...
- vanattab 1y ago
- reaperducer 1y agoParaphrasing a comedian during one of the previous shutdowns: "If they're still taking money out of my paycheck, it's not shut down."
- iLoveOncall 1y ago[flagged]
- flanked-evergl 1y ago[flagged]
- xoa 1y agoNo, it's entirely true despite you weirdly canvassing this thread spouting your lies. The Republicans have the majority. They can pass any budget they want, whenever they want, with no cooperation required. They (and you) now want to hide behind the figleaf of the filibuster again despite having mostly finished it's rightful gutting earlier this year, but that too is purely a Senate rule which can be tossed with 51 votes. So it's on the GOP, 100%. If they want minority party votes, then they need to negotiate with said minority party duh. If instead they want to govern alone (which all actions and words indicate is true) then they must govern alone.
- flanked-evergl 1y ago> They can pass any budget they want, whenever they want, with no cooperation required. Due to the filibuster rule in the senate, the clean CR could not continue without 60 votes. It's amazing how people who graduate from high-school are unaware of the basics of US politics.
- xoa 1y ago>Due to the filibuster rule in the senate, the clean CR could not continue without 60 votes. It's amazing how people who graduate from high-school are unaware of the basics of US politics. What's amazing is how somebody who claims to have graduated from high school is so mind locked into their narrative and so enraged at anything to the contrary that they can't even make it to the very next sentence which addressed this!
- 1y ago
- flanked-evergl 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- r0ckarong 1y agoYou tired of all this winning yet?
- flanked-evergl 1y ago[flagged]
- johnnyanmac 1y agoI'm in a coma from how tired I am of this winning.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- JohnTHaller 1y agoRepublicans control the House, Senate, and White House. They didn't bother to show up to avert the shutdown. The House convened for 2 minutes and refused to allow any discussion yesterday.