11 ms·

US shutdown: Senate reaches fiscal deal

32 points by kiyanforoughi 13y ago

angersock 13y ago
More's the pity--would've been nice to have an excuse to maybe kick all the bastards out of office. Vote early, vote often.
- pyrocat 13y ago
  The fact that it came to this point isn't enough?
  - protomyth 13y ago
    Its come to this point quite often and probably will in the future. Both parties use the debt ceiling as a time to try to get what they want. Read each parties statements in the 2000 - 2008 era for a laugh at how they switched (almost word for word) this time.
    - r00fus 13y ago
      I don't remember Democrats ever using threats over the debt ceiling. It seems to be specifically right-wing phenomenon [1]. In fact there are some for whom the endgame seems to be to force the government to default and assume it won't be catastrophic for the economy (one wonders if these folks have significant short/call positions). [1] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/for-many-hard-liners-debt-default-is-the-goal/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/for-many-hard-l...
      - protomyth 13y ago
        Look at the run-up to the 2006 bill. 1999 was also a very weird one.
        r00fus 13y ago
        Can you provide some links or analysis? I don't find any threats.
  - simba-hiiipower 13y ago
    it is. but unfortunately we don't have an alternative..
- Aloisius 13y ago
  All the bastards didn't cause this.
  - angersock 13y ago
    It's true, it's true...some merely went along with it.
- badman_ting 13y ago
  Voting is how these people got in office to begin with. The problem is them, and the problem is us.
  - swalsh 13y ago
    Exactly, this whole fiasco has really highlighted that there exists some fundamental problem in the system today. Normally the system of checks, and balances actually works so no individual can exploit the entirety... and if they do, they only have a limit time span to cause havoc, at which point the people vote them out. however there's two flaws. A lot of people are putting emphasis on gerrymandering. Which I suppose is a practical problem that at least has some semblance of possibly being solved. However to me gerrymandering is really just exposing an even deeper problem, which is a large uneducated populous that is not only becoming uninformed but misinformed... and since we all live in our own bubbles, its really easy to gain confidence that the misinformation we have is true. Remember that Ted talk a few years ago about the filter bubble? This is a practical reality of its effects... The thing that scares me on a personal level, is I have no clue if the information I take for granted is true or not... and i may very well be just as guilty in voting for the wrong candidates.
- xradionut 13y ago
  When you to want reform an institution, you need to make sure you don't replace the bad with the worse. The main asshat in Congress stirring the pot and helping cause this dissention is a first term senator: Ted Cruz. What we have is a bunch of new regressive "reformers" that are actually being funded by the Koch brothers and people of their ilk, that think destroying the government is a good thing.
dmazin 13y ago
I thought the issue was in the House, and this does not say that the House's game of chicken is over and anything has been resolved there, merely that "some" republicans are joining the democrats. Can someone explain why this item means good news?
- andy112 13y ago
  The primary reason the House has been a deal-stopper so far is more because of Boehner's resistance to bring bills to the floor unless they would be supported by a majority of the House Republicans regardless of whether they'd pass a floor vote. It's assuming (IMO correctly) that it will be too politically difficult for Boehner to prevent the Senate's bill from coming to the floor of the House and being voted on. In the House vote, it's likely the most conservative House members will still vote against it, but there should be more than enough votes for it to be passed (with the House votes coming from moderate Republicans + all/nearly all Democrats).
  - JRobertson 13y ago
    Boenher's refusal to bring the bill to the floor has been frustrating. Equally frustrating has been Harry Reid's refusal to bring bills to the Senate floor. Both sides were standing firm by their "ideals". Neither side made any sincere efforts to find an actual solution.
    - dragontamer 13y ago
      Republicans didn't know how to compromise here. Allegedly, they want to open the government. All Democrats want to do is open the government. Apparently, both sides want to open the government. So... why should Democrats cede the Republicans on issues? Compromise is when both sides give up something to meet in the middle. But Republicans haven't "given up" anything in any of their deals.
      - JRobertson 13y ago
        I agree 100%. I mentioned "Both sides" in my post. I am equally frustrated by the republicans and the Democrats. When the Republican leader of the house refuses to bring bills to the floor AND the Democratic leader of the Senate refuses to bring bills to the floor they're both playing politics. I'm not arguing that democrats are to blame. I'm arguing that BOTH sides are involved in these games, and BOTH sides should have been willing to bring more to the table. I'm disappointed in how quickly HN is heading towards Reddit in its down voting. You can't even try to keep the conversation factual and mention the issues on both sides. Either you jump in with the current media story of how it's all republicans fault or you get down voted.
known 13y ago
American economy will slide till https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triffin_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triffin_dilemma is resolved.
tenpoundhammer 13y ago
Everyone that knows anything about politics knew this is exactly how it would work out. It has been political theater the enter time. That's why the financial markets didn't flinch, they knew it would never come to default. The politicians are playing stupid games with gullible people, and they aren't doing it to serve their constituents. They are doing it to serve themselves and their corporate donors. If this isn't proof of a broken system that fails to serve the people, I don't know what is.
- gnarbarian 13y ago
  I've also heard it described as a tactic to ensure the public is grateful for whatever deal is ultimately struck.
- smoyer 13y ago
  Exactly ... and if you're in the US, you really have to think about who you're voting for. I'm not voting for incumbents in November - period! There's no point in having an agenda when NOTHING is working anyway, so we might as well elect individuals (in either party) who might actually do their jobs!
  - dragontamer 13y ago
    Thats a relatively close minded approach that may destroy America. Question: did your Representative contribute to the blocking of the bills? Is it really your representative's fault for the shutdown? Some Senators, such as Senator McCain have gone against his party and tried to support the bipartisan effort to reopen the government. (Demonstrating that maybe McCain would have served as a decent President). Research your senators, research your representatives. Learn their names, and what they did during the shutdown. DONT blindly elect them away. Actually do your research and make an informed choice. Too many Americans don't understand politics. No wonder we have so many idiots in Congress.
    - smoyer 13y ago
      It was intentionally close-minded, but intended to counteract the huge number of people that simply vote for the incumbent. And if you truly believe your congressman isn't part of the problem (and you've researched his/her positions enough to know what he/she stands for), by all means reelect the lone competent individual. On the other hand, it's entirely possible that they'd each SEEM competent if viewed individually (http://www.despair.com/meetings.html http://www.despair.com/meetings.html). How about this instead ... we pick a high-karma HN'er from each district and elect them. At least we could expect some logic (I hope).
dancecodes 13y ago
As we know appr. 2 405 510 175 users in internet. If we send 1-2 dollar to US it can help. I can send something to save US.
- dancecodes 13y ago
  because world depends from US and back. Lets open kickstarter or something else.
- ihsw 13y ago
  I'd send a dollar but only if it went towards a swift kick in every single American's ass.
  - dancecodes 13y ago
    save ass its good facility
vaadu 13y ago
unconstitutional? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_Clause The Origination Clause, sometimes called the Revenue Clause, is part of the United States Constitution. This clause says that all bills for raising revenue must start in the House of Representatives, but the Senate can amend them as in the case of non-revenue bills.
- chaosphere2112 13y ago
  What revenue is being raised? This is a hike of the debt limit, and allocation of funds for spending. No new taxes to speak of.
vaadu 13y ago
Ironic that in 2006 Senator Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling for many of the same reasons that the GOP is voicing today.
- MisterBastahrd 13y ago
  One of Ronald Reagan's most famous quotes was from a propaganda piece against Medicare, about how it would end freedom in the country... but when he became president he expanded it. Being President has a way to change one's perspective.
  - ihsw 13y ago
    Utter nonsense, a more plausible and realistic explanation would be Presidential candidates say anything to get themselves into power, and then it becomes abundantly clear that the President is little else than a figurehead. The goals, perspective, opinion, etc of the President are irrelevant -- they are (and always will be) a puppet.
ck2 13y ago
Stay tuned for part 2 in February. Then part 3 later in 2014. Sadly the elections won't fix this because of gerrymandering which is worse than any amount of money in politics. The House will always be toxic because of it. Senators cannot play that game which is why they tend to be slightly more sane.
- jskonhovd 13y ago
  I still don't understand why we don't use algorithms to fix gerrymandering. https://code.google.com/p/redistricter/ https://code.google.com/p/redistricter/
  - ck2 13y ago
    It's because you are thinking logically. Politics sadly has nothing to do with logic, it's a popularity contest.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    Because gerrymandering isn't the problem -- as evidenced by the fact that states that have non-partisan redistricting processes haven't managed to reduce the problem. There is no method of apportioning single-member districts whose representatives are elected in FPTP elections that has good results. Gerrymandering is politicians working to direct the way in which such a system fails in their own favor, but such a system is going to fail one way or another.
  - krapp 13y ago
    Because as far as the politicians who benefit from gerrymandering are concerned, it's not broken.

32 points by kiyanforoughi 13y ago

More's the pity--would've been nice to have an excuse to maybe kick all the bastards out of office. Vote early, vote often.

pyrocat 13y ago
The fact that it came to this point isn't enough?
- protomyth 13y ago
  Its come to this point quite often and probably will in the future. Both parties use the debt ceiling as a time to try to get what they want. Read each parties statements in the 2000 - 2008 era for a laugh at how they switched (almost word for word) this time.
  - r00fus 13y ago
    I don't remember Democrats ever using threats over the debt ceiling. It seems to be specifically right-wing phenomenon [1]. In fact there are some for whom the endgame seems to be to force the government to default and assume it won't be catastrophic for the economy (one wonders if these folks have significant short/call positions). [1] http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/for-many-hard-liners-debt-default-is-the-goal/ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/for-many-hard-l...
    - protomyth 13y ago
      Look at the run-up to the 2006 bill. 1999 was also a very weird one.
      - r00fus 13y ago
        Can you provide some links or analysis? I don't find any threats.
- simba-hiiipower 13y ago
  it is. but unfortunately we don't have an alternative..
Aloisius 13y ago
All the bastards didn't cause this.
- angersock 13y ago
  It's true, it's true...some merely went along with it.
badman_ting 13y ago
Voting is how these people got in office to begin with. The problem is them, and the problem is us.
- swalsh 13y ago
  Exactly, this whole fiasco has really highlighted that there exists some fundamental problem in the system today. Normally the system of checks, and balances actually works so no individual can exploit the entirety... and if they do, they only have a limit time span to cause havoc, at which point the people vote them out. however there's two flaws. A lot of people are putting emphasis on gerrymandering. Which I suppose is a practical problem that at least has some semblance of possibly being solved. However to me gerrymandering is really just exposing an even deeper problem, which is a large uneducated populous that is not only becoming uninformed but misinformed... and since we all live in our own bubbles, its really easy to gain confidence that the misinformation we have is true. Remember that Ted talk a few years ago about the filter bubble? This is a practical reality of its effects... The thing that scares me on a personal level, is I have no clue if the information I take for granted is true or not... and i may very well be just as guilty in voting for the wrong candidates.
xradionut 13y ago
When you to want reform an institution, you need to make sure you don't replace the bad with the worse. The main asshat in Congress stirring the pot and helping cause this dissention is a first term senator: Ted Cruz. What we have is a bunch of new regressive "reformers" that are actually being funded by the Koch brothers and people of their ilk, that think destroying the government is a good thing.

dmazin 13y ago

I thought the issue was in the House, and this does not say that the House's game of chicken is over and anything has been resolved there, merely that "some" republicans are joining the democrats. Can someone explain why this item means good news?

andy112 13y ago
The primary reason the House has been a deal-stopper so far is more because of Boehner's resistance to bring bills to the floor unless they would be supported by a majority of the House Republicans regardless of whether they'd pass a floor vote. It's assuming (IMO correctly) that it will be too politically difficult for Boehner to prevent the Senate's bill from coming to the floor of the House and being voted on. In the House vote, it's likely the most conservative House members will still vote against it, but there should be more than enough votes for it to be passed (with the House votes coming from moderate Republicans + all/nearly all Democrats).
- JRobertson 13y ago
  Boenher's refusal to bring the bill to the floor has been frustrating. Equally frustrating has been Harry Reid's refusal to bring bills to the Senate floor. Both sides were standing firm by their "ideals". Neither side made any sincere efforts to find an actual solution.
  - dragontamer 13y ago
    Republicans didn't know how to compromise here. Allegedly, they want to open the government. All Democrats want to do is open the government. Apparently, both sides want to open the government. So... why should Democrats cede the Republicans on issues? Compromise is when both sides give up something to meet in the middle. But Republicans haven't "given up" anything in any of their deals.
    - JRobertson 13y ago
      I agree 100%. I mentioned "Both sides" in my post. I am equally frustrated by the republicans and the Democrats. When the Republican leader of the house refuses to bring bills to the floor AND the Democratic leader of the Senate refuses to bring bills to the floor they're both playing politics. I'm not arguing that democrats are to blame. I'm arguing that BOTH sides are involved in these games, and BOTH sides should have been willing to bring more to the table. I'm disappointed in how quickly HN is heading towards Reddit in its down voting. You can't even try to keep the conversation factual and mention the issues on both sides. Either you jump in with the current media story of how it's all republicans fault or you get down voted.

known 13y ago

American economy will slide till https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triffin_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triffin_dilemma is resolved.

tenpoundhammer 13y ago

Everyone that knows anything about politics knew this is exactly how it would work out. It has been political theater the enter time. That's why the financial markets didn't flinch, they knew it would never come to default. The politicians are playing stupid games with gullible people, and they aren't doing it to serve their constituents. They are doing it to serve themselves and their corporate donors. If this isn't proof of a broken system that fails to serve the people, I don't know what is.

gnarbarian 13y ago
I've also heard it described as a tactic to ensure the public is grateful for whatever deal is ultimately struck.
smoyer 13y ago
Exactly ... and if you're in the US, you really have to think about who you're voting for. I'm not voting for incumbents in November - period! There's no point in having an agenda when NOTHING is working anyway, so we might as well elect individuals (in either party) who might actually do their jobs!
- dragontamer 13y ago
  Thats a relatively close minded approach that may destroy America. Question: did your Representative contribute to the blocking of the bills? Is it really your representative's fault for the shutdown? Some Senators, such as Senator McCain have gone against his party and tried to support the bipartisan effort to reopen the government. (Demonstrating that maybe McCain would have served as a decent President). Research your senators, research your representatives. Learn their names, and what they did during the shutdown. DONT blindly elect them away. Actually do your research and make an informed choice. Too many Americans don't understand politics. No wonder we have so many idiots in Congress.
  - smoyer 13y ago
    It was intentionally close-minded, but intended to counteract the huge number of people that simply vote for the incumbent. And if you truly believe your congressman isn't part of the problem (and you've researched his/her positions enough to know what he/she stands for), by all means reelect the lone competent individual. On the other hand, it's entirely possible that they'd each SEEM competent if viewed individually (http://www.despair.com/meetings.html http://www.despair.com/meetings.html). How about this instead ... we pick a high-karma HN'er from each district and elect them. At least we could expect some logic (I hope).

dancecodes 13y ago

As we know appr. 2 405 510 175 users in internet. If we send 1-2 dollar to US it can help. I can send something to save US.

dancecodes 13y ago
because world depends from US and back. Lets open kickstarter or something else.
ihsw 13y ago
I'd send a dollar but only if it went towards a swift kick in every single American's ass.
- dancecodes 13y ago
  save ass its good facility

vaadu 13y ago

unconstitutional? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_Clause https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_Clause The Origination Clause, sometimes called the Revenue Clause, is part of the United States Constitution. This clause says that all bills for raising revenue must start in the House of Representatives, but the Senate can amend them as in the case of non-revenue bills.

chaosphere2112 13y ago
What revenue is being raised? This is a hike of the debt limit, and allocation of funds for spending. No new taxes to speak of.

vaadu 13y ago

Ironic that in 2006 Senator Obama voted against raising the debt ceiling for many of the same reasons that the GOP is voicing today.

MisterBastahrd 13y ago
One of Ronald Reagan's most famous quotes was from a propaganda piece against Medicare, about how it would end freedom in the country... but when he became president he expanded it. Being President has a way to change one's perspective.
- ihsw 13y ago
  Utter nonsense, a more plausible and realistic explanation would be Presidential candidates say anything to get themselves into power, and then it becomes abundantly clear that the President is little else than a figurehead. The goals, perspective, opinion, etc of the President are irrelevant -- they are (and always will be) a puppet.

ck2 13y ago

Stay tuned for part 2 in February. Then part 3 later in 2014. Sadly the elections won't fix this because of gerrymandering which is worse than any amount of money in politics. The House will always be toxic because of it. Senators cannot play that game which is why they tend to be slightly more sane.

jskonhovd 13y ago
I still don't understand why we don't use algorithms to fix gerrymandering. https://code.google.com/p/redistricter/ https://code.google.com/p/redistricter/
- ck2 13y ago
  It's because you are thinking logically. Politics sadly has nothing to do with logic, it's a popularity contest.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  Because gerrymandering isn't the problem -- as evidenced by the fact that states that have non-partisan redistricting processes haven't managed to reduce the problem. There is no method of apportioning single-member districts whose representatives are elected in FPTP elections that has good results. Gerrymandering is politicians working to direct the way in which such a system fails in their own favor, but such a system is going to fail one way or another.
- krapp 13y ago
  Because as far as the politicians who benefit from gerrymandering are concerned, it's not broken.