GOP Dropping Obamacare in Shutdown Debate? (focusing on austerity instead)
Source: CNN
The stalemate involves Republicans trying to use the spending and debt limit deadlines as leverage to wring concessions from Obama and Democrats. GOP Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky on Wednesday, "the only way you get concessions out of him is, unfortunately, you have to negotiate around this deadline."
Boehner and Republicans are demanding that Obama and Senate Democrats negotiate on deficit reduction steps that would be part of legislation to reopen the government and raise the limit on federal borrowing needed to pay the bills.
Obama refuses to enter formal talks until the shutdown ends and the debt ceiling has been raised to remove the threat of default, which economists warn could cause another recession.
White House spokesman Jay Carney said Obama was disappointed that Boehner was limiting attendance at Thursday's meeting to less than 20 of the more than 200 House Republicans. "The president thought it was important to talk directly with the members who forced this economic crisis on the country" about the potential harmful impacts from the shutdown and a possible default, Carney said in a statement, repeating that Obama "will not pay the Republicans ransom for doing their job."
Meanwhile, GOP leaders were distancing themselves from demands by tea party conservatives to also make dismantling Obamacare a condition for agreement.
Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/09/politics/shutdown-showdown/
gopiscrap
(23,765 posts)obxhead
(8,434 posts)The GOP must "get" something after all of this. This may just be them announcing that they know the ACA is up and running and they can't get that delayed.
Now they just try to get something to put in their TV ads next year.
Hopefully Obama and the Dems stand firm and don't give anything else we deserve away to end this thing.
targetpractice
(4,919 posts)I do not believe the defund ObamaCare stunt was part of the original master plan.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)They're right - that's exactly the effect because of the selective nature of the cuts and limited reauthorization bills for military-related programs.
They'll take this out to within a few days of the deadline, and then declare victory. And, you know what, to their RW constituents they're heroes.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)The dismantling of the social welfare system.
We will now see whether Obama gives it to them.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)of a Grand Bargain. We already know what he's willing to bargain away (SS and Medicare benefits) and what he wants (deficit reduction) because he's stated it before negotiations even start. There's a word for what comes out of that deal, one way or the other: Austerity.
DJ13
(23,671 posts)Betrayal
KansDem
(28,498 posts)You don't get to "negotiate." Capiche?!!
Uncle Joe
(58,417 posts)as an excuse or to create motivation to pass odious and detrimental legislation against our democratic republic.
Rolling back FDR's New Deal ie: Social Security etc. etc. has been in their cross hairs since inception, that's what this is all about.
To say the Congressional Republicans are scum is an insult to scum.
Thanks for the thread, big_dog.
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)nm
Judi Lynn
(160,621 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)then start talking about Medicare and Social Security, then bring up a debt ceiling extension, but leave the government closed?
Oafs.
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,036 posts)chuckstevens
(1,201 posts)Not one fucking concession on ANYTHING! Polls show the public blames GOP for all of this. As a Cubs fan I know all about snatching "defeat from the jaws of victory." If the Democrats give one inch, they are fools. Hold Strong!
MSMITH33156
(879 posts)"eff" and "you".
There are 3 parts of the government involved in passing a law: (1) The Senate, (2) The House, (3) The President.
We control 2 of 3. Why in the hell should we have to give into them? They are basically saying, "if you don't give us what we want, we will ruin the economy." That is absurd.
If the Republicans want to pass new laws, they need to negotiate that with the Senate and the President, and in those negotiations, they have to GIVE more than they TAKE. Anything else, and Democrats should completely refuse. Who is the minority party to try and inflict their will on the majority? In the W years, we didn't threaten to ruin the economy or demand concessions if he didn't end the Iraq War, or raise taxes, or some nonsense like that. We used proper legislative channels like everyone else always has.
And that's what the Republicans should be forced to do, and if they do that, then in those negotiations, they have less leverage than the Democrats, so the deal should favor liberals. Period. End of story. The idea that they sit here, make demands, and then say, "oh, he won't meet us half way" is so detached from reality. The reason they can't actually get any of their horrific legislative agendas accomplished is because they are a minority party.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)yes.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)And the wackiness is not really in Washington, D.C., it's nation-wide, wherever hate radio and Faux rules. Which is a lot of acreage.
munster69
(107 posts)Otherwise boner will be on TV claiming he got 95% of what he wanted.
bhikkhu
(10,724 posts)where they believe the president will be more flexible.
I know many here worry that he will be more flexible, but recall that in every instance where he actually suggested any reform that reduced benefits, it was accompanied by inflexible provisions. Such as protections for everyone who really needed those benefits, and tax increases on the wealthy to pay for those protections. Addressing income inequality has always been the central non-negotiable focus.
Rebellious Republican
(5,029 posts)kiranon
(1,727 posts)amount back to amount Democrats wanted originally and not settle for lesser Republican amount. No way should Obama agree to cut Social Security or Veterans Benefits or anything else. Austerity didn't work in Europe and it won't work here. Have Robert Reichand Paul Krugman assist if the Administration doesn't know how to hang tough enough in these negotiations.
maindawg
(1,151 posts)hey now want more of the same. Thats why I learned to say ' thank you sir , may I have another' a long time ago.
secondvariety
(1,245 posts)the scrapings off Obama's shoe and nothing more.
tclambert
(11,087 posts)The deficit has been going down. The budget is smaller than the one Ryan wanted during the last election. The economy is ever so slowly, but steadily, improving. If they want to shift the focus to that, they make themselves look dumber yet.
I think they have already established that Tea Party member = dumbass.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Liberalynn
(7,549 posts)duffyduff
(3,251 posts)Obama had better not put another goddamned "Grand Bargain" bullshit proposal like he did last time.
ThoughtCriminal
(14,049 posts)Agree to dismantle Jupiter medium-range missile sites in Turkey and Italy.
Monk06
(7,675 posts)Answer has to be NO negotiation.
Austerity programs have caused Europe to slow it's comeback. We don't need to see that here.
How hard is it to understand that the economy flows up and not down.
10 Lots of people with extra money
20 They buy more stuff
30 That causes more jobs as you keep up with demand
40 That allows for the upper management to take a percentage.
50 That gives more people extra money.
60 goto 10
Why is a simple concept so hard to understand. Put the damn money in the hands of those who will run it through the system.
xfundy
(5,105 posts)MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Oh boy!
Myrina
(12,296 posts)"We have to have something. I don't know that we even know what that something is. But we have to get something."