US Politics January 2018: "You All Just Got A Lot Richer"

Had dinner with a couple of social workers last night, and they confirmed. They have detected a serious uptick in anxiety and stress of their patients thanks to Trump.

News reports have the Women's March in Chicago at numbers equal to or greater than last year's.

Their messaging is absolute shit.

I wonder how many Dem reps think this:

A shift in the Dem message:
IL Dem Rep Gutierrez: "It’s not about a wall. We’ll build him a wall. Tell us how high you want it. But free the dreamers"

— Deirdre Walsh (@deirdrewalshcnn) January 20, 2018

dems have been clumsy about "the wall" messaging since trump first brought it up in the campaign, already ceding him the territory when trying to debate him on whether "mexico will pay for it" rather than tossing it off as a ridiculous idea in the first place

rather than tossing it off as a ridiculous idea in the first place

as I recall, it was derided as a ridiculous idea from the start. somehow this didn't make any difference to the people who responded positively to it. or negatively. the problem is that getting all democrats to align to a uniform message is impossible.

I think every single person involved is operating with a different definition of "wall."

This is maddening, standard Dem negotiating skillz.

And why is Schumer publicly copping to putting a wall on the table in WH meeting? If there's anything to learn from your opposition here it's STFU

Anyway, who cares about a shutdown. Even when government's working it's barely working, so where's the harm in working less. Send these dummies to their room and make them think about what they've done.

Beautiful weather all over our great country, a perfect day for all Women to March. Get out there now to celebrate the historic milestones and unprecedented economic success and wealth creation that has taken place over the last 12 months. Lowest female unemployment in 18 years!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 20, 2018

xpost I was somewhat serious. I've read a few faq styled prefers, and aside from general inconveniences and museum closings what is the biggest impact of a government shutdown, at least in the short term? My point was essentially, at least initially, that huge chunks of the government are currently being dismantled, and are definitely understaffed, with countless positions left unfilled, seemingly on purpose. How is that much different from a shutdown? The important stuff continues to work, because it is important. And everybody always gets paid when it is over. Every single facet of the current Administration is working against itself, so why not be glad they are forced to do it less?

enjoy your march ladies, we appreciate the compliment!

what is the biggest impact of a government shutdown, at least in the short term?

This is like saying breaking your leg doesn't kill you, and after it mends you can walk around just as much as you did before.

In the 2013 shutdown, the effects of the furloughs and other shutdowns in government activity included:

Tax refunds totaling almost $4 billion were delayed.
The Women, Infants, and Children nutrition program went unfunded.
Federal research activities at the National Institutes of Health (which lost about three-quarters of its employees), the National Science Foundation (which lost 98 percent of its workforce), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (which lost two-thirds) shut down nearly entirely; the CDC scaled back its monitoring of disease outbreaks.
Environmental Protection Agency inspections halted at 1,200 locations.
The Food and Drug Administration delayed approval of drugs and medical devices.
The national parks shut down, resulting in $500 million in lost consumer spending from tourism.
Reviews of veterans’ disability applications slowed to a halt, with nearly 20,000 applications per week not being evaluated.

https://www.vox.com/2018/1/19/16910986/government-shutdown-what-shuts-down-exempt-essential-nonessential

Josh I do think there's an argument to be made strictly in terms of political capital, but not "oh well it doesn't work anyway"

I don't mean "burn it all down." But the people most directly affected are government workers, iirc. Which is bad for them, and I feel terrible for any federal employee living paycheck to paycheck (if they exist). But the world keeps turning, essential services keep operating.

Some of those xpost things are pretty vague ("CDC scaled back its monitoring of disease outbreaks"), but already at least a couple of those things (like closing of national parks) are not happening this year, reportedly. Or at least not entirely. My point, again, was that this administration was already doing a lot of those delays and cuts and haltings *on purpose*. I guess one could argue it could be worse, but, like, "Environmental Protection Agency inspections halted at 1,200 locations" - the head of the EPA wants to halt the EPA and has been rolling back regulations, which in many ways is worse than a pause in inspections.

Like, is the president important? Of course. But would I prefer *this* president leave Washington and go on vacation forever and not work at all? Yes.

"if they exist" wow c'mon man. how many people on this board would be unaffected if their employer stopped existing for a period of time yet unknown? fine to imagine a straw man of wealthy high-skilled federal employees with deep reserves of savings but how many of those furloughed are, like, janitors and security guards and people who work in the mail room and the cafeteria and the employee parking garage? how many of them can just go without paychecks at length with no consequences, even if at the end of it a deal is brokered to give them back pay for the period?

Yeah, that wasn’t at all clear.

And the vacancies in these agencies are by and large the chairs and directorships. There are tens of thousands of federal employees every day keeping the engine running despite it all, esp at the local level.

None of this btw is mutually exclusive to a jolt of schadenfreude that it's happening to this prez at this moment

I oversee federal WIOA grants at the local level, and the direction we've been given is to come to work Monday and that our pass-through funder has 3-4 weeks in reserve. After that, things get dicey.
The resources I oversee include funding for contractors like case workers and navigators. These are people that make 40-60k in an expensive city. You better fuckin believe a missed paycheck will affect them.
And that's not even considering the effects on the clients they serve.

That's good to learn, I didn't know so stand corrected.

So anyway then, who is holding who hostage in this scenario? GOP holding Dreamers and CHIP kids hostage for their own shit? Or Dems holding working class government employees hostage for the sake of Dreamers et al.?

Longest government shutdown was ... 21 days, right?

And this just in:

Representative Patrick Meehan, a Pennsylvania Republican who has taken a leading role in fighting sexual harassment in Congress, used thousands of dollars in taxpayer money to settle his own misconduct complaint after a former aide accused him last year of making unwanted romantic overtures to her, according to several people familiar with the settlement.

A married father of three, Mr. Meehan, 62, had long expressed interest in the personal life of the aide, who was decades younger and had regarded the congressman as a father figure, according to three people who worked with the office and four others with whom she discussed her tenure there.

But after the woman became involved in a serious relationship with someone outside the office last year, Mr. Meehan professed his romantic desires for her — first in person, and then in a handwritten letter — and he grew hostile when she did not reciprocate, the people familiar with her time in the office said.

who is holding who hostage in this scenario?

Perhaps a better question is: whose position, if adopted as the solution to the standoff, would produce better results for the nation?

For sure. Put elsewhere, if and when this ends and there is no beneficial DACA deal you'll know the Dems lost. But I really hope they don't give up the house to get there.

And I really hope they don't give up the House to stay where they currently are. But I'm hopeful.

That's good to learn, I didn't know so stand corrected.

So anyway then, who is holding who hostage in this scenario? GOP holding Dreamers and CHIP kids hostage for their own shit? Or Dems holding working class government employees hostage for the sake of Dreamers et al.?

― Josh in Chicago

so, worst case scenario here is everybody decides that democrats are ruining everything for the benefit of a couple of illegals. and then what? do the democrats get to do _anything_ to counter the administration besides pontificate? make pretty speeches but the second they do something the slightest bit controversial everybody cuts bait and runs?

the bigger issue is that this is the democrats' best opportunity to reclaim some semblance of political clout. if they don't win this one, i don't see them winning anything meaningful at all ever again.

I agree with that. If the country indeed does not approve of this administration, then that is their leverage, even if they lack numbers. But (and I suppose this is the gamble) if they fail to parlay momentum of dissatisfaction into November wins, then it's going to be a long few years.

Here's a great example (and further corrective to my flip ignorance) of what indirect effects a shutdown can have:

A federal government shutdown could complicate CDC's ability to know, in real time, whether flu cases are continuing to increase. Personnel like Brammer, who works in the annual influenza program, are among the 63 percent of agency employees who would be furloughed, according to the updated 2018 contingency plan from the Health and Human Services Department. Throughout CDC, more than 8,500 employees would be furloughed.

State labs would continue to operate and monitor flu activity, test specimens and send that information to the CDC. “The states would still be doing their jobs,” Brammer said. But if CDC epidemiologists and others monitoring the data are not at work, that data “would not be put together on a national level.”

i like to hope that shutdowns demonstrate just how many important things depend on the government, but that never seems to make any difference

with regard to the political calculus - trump's action on DACA created a humanitarian crisis. hundreds of thousands of people's lives are poised to be permanently altered. even if trump doesn't actively move forward on deporting them (hmmmm) they will be cast into total uncertainty about their entire futures. if he does, relationships and friendships and families will be torn apart. anything they've worked for, great or small, will be obliterated as they're forced to move away from the place they've lived effectively their whole lives. it's infuriating that trump can set the agenda by order and force the democrats to put it all on the line to address just one of the many problems he's created, but in this case i'll say putting it on the line is "worth it" by pretty much any metric one could cobble together. do we expect the house to vote on destroying seven hundred thousand other lives between 2019 and 2021? whose? if not, then this is probably the most important thing democrats are going to get to vote on whether this "costs" them the house next year or not. what do we want them to save their energy for exactly?

Is it worth it to get a DACA deal if they throw in all sorts of other poison pill anti-immigration stuff, including a wall?

Because that's part of the impasse right?

Which is bad for them, and I feel terrible for any federal employee living paycheck to paycheck (if they exist).

Hi! :)

Is it worth it to get a DACA deal if they throw in all sorts of other poison pill anti-immigration stuff, including a wall?

The hard rock the democrats are up against is that the Republicans control the House the Senate, and the Presidency. The Dems have some leverage in the Senate due to the rules there, but getting concessions means making concessions, too.

The wall is expensive, but by itself it probably won't do much good or harm either way, other than its wretched symbolism and the waste of money. So, if it secures the futures of 700,000 young people and provides a path to citizenship, it would be well worth it from my perspective.

I thought the Dem strategy was sposed to be OBSTRUCT

My understanding is that the wall was the least of it. There are also other immigration curbs and further Healthcare cuts that were in the house bill right?

So an immigration deal needs to simultaneously win 1.) Schumer & Durbin's votes 2.) John Kelly & Stephen Miller's recommendation to Trump to endorse it. 3.) Paul Ryan's commitment to a House vote even if it splits the majority. Hmmm.

— Susan Davis (@DaviSusan) January 20, 2018

Where's Reince Priebus when you need him

The post piece about the last couple of weeks is nuts. Apologies if already posted.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/negotiating-with-jell-o-how-trumps-shifting-positions-fueled-the-rush-to-a-shutdown/2018/01/20/81215b90-fd71-11e7-a46b-a3614530bd87_story.html

Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.), speaking to reporters Friday night about his general frustrations with the process, said that “our country was founded by geniuses, but it’s being run by idiots.”

Next Month's Title?

lol

In politics, he resembles at times an amateur jazz musician — moody and improvisational, but without the technical chops to hold a piece together.

Birth Of The Tool

Ha.

Dingus Ah Um

A Taco Supreme

Tyrant Steps

So is dummy going to Florida for his fundraiser/self-celebration? It would be horrible optics to do so, which makes me think he will do it.

we can only hope so

The wall is expensive, but by itself it probably won't do much good or harm either way, other than its wretched symbolism and the waste of money. So, if it secures the futures of 700,000 young people and provides a path to citizenship, it would be well worth it from my perspective.

Building it, and then tearing it down in 2021, would be a reasonable approximation of Keynes’ “burying banknotes and then digging them up” bit from General Theory.

I’m not opposed to going with that as a jobs program tbf

Someone should refocus Trump on building a ladder to the moon.