Peak Oil News and Message Boards

WASHINGTON -- House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) upped the odds of a government shutdown Thursday, saying he would not support a short-term funding bill if his near-certain budget battle between the House and the Democratic-run Senate takes longer than two weeks.

As the clock ticks down to March 4, when the current stopgap funding measure expires, Boehner shot down what many considered to be the surest way to keep government agencies running while the two chambers hammer out the differences between their respective spending bills.

(snip)

If a government shutdown occurs, thousands of government programs would shut down immediately, with workers and contractors losing their paychecks until funding started up again, at which point they would be paid retroactively.

If the House GOP's spending plan is passed as is, economists estimate that 1 million Americans could lose their jobs. Boehner, who previously said "so be it" when presented with the possibility of public-sector job losses resulting from budget cuts, seemed to stand behind that sentiment on Thursday.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/17/john-boehner-wont-back-budget-stopgap_n_824633.html

At his press conference Tuesday, Obama also warned against suggestions of a shutdown. "This is not an abstraction," he said. "People don't get their Social Security checks. They don't get their veterans payments. Basic functions shut down. And it -- that, also, would have a adverse effect on our economic recovery."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2011/02/what_might_a_government_shutdo_1.html

Sixstrings wrote:Well lots of seniors and vets are gonna be mad if their benefits stop due to a shutdown.

PrestonSturges wrote:Close the airports, close the locks on the Ohio river, furlough the customs agents and close the borders, send home the Capitol Hill police department, turn off the lights in Senate, and close the Smithsonian... demand that Social Security be cut.

pup55 wrote:http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2011/02/06/sotu.simpson.extended.intv.cnn.html

This was on the other night. Simpson correctly says that all of the earmarks, discretionary spending, waste fraud and abuse and everything else is chicken feed, and unless they start to cut medicare, medicaid, social security and defense, the problem will continue.

And it also correctly says that the problem will not get fixed because the re-election of the politicians who have to vote for it is more important than doing the right thing....

PrestonSturges wrote: lock the border crossings

Outcast_Searcher wrote:

pup55 wrote:http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/politics/2011/02/06/sotu.simpson.extended.intv.cnn.html

This was on the other night. Simpson correctly says that all of the earmarks, discretionary spending, waste fraud and abuse and everything else is chicken feed, and unless they start to cut medicare, medicaid, social security and defense, the problem will continue.

And it also correctly says that the problem will not get fixed because the re-election of the politicians who have to vote for it is more important than doing the right thing....

+1

When I saw this interview on "State of the Union", it was truly amazing and really refreshing to see a Washington politician actually talk about something candidly and honestly.

It was so weird it reminded me of Wen Jaibao's interview with Fareed Zakaria on his GPS show when he said there should be free speech rights in China (I thought I might be stroking out when I heard that).

Sadly, he's exactly right. Voters want "theirs" no matter what is good for the country, so we'll all go over the cliff together instead of compromising and having us all sacrifice "some" while we still reasonably can.

We collectively have the (idiot) govvernmnt representation we deserve.

Keith_McClary wrote:What budget-cutting amendments has the House passed this week?
Dozens of 'em. See any patterns?

Lore wrote:What jokers, a pretty safe game of making tuff cuts when you know that the measures will never pass the Senate or the Presidential veto.

I say let them all go through and more, then watch the Tea Party hounds wail. It's all fine when you assume it's not your neck on the line. Just be careful what you ask for.