2mo ago

38 House Republicans give Trump the finger in shutdown vote

www.thedailybeast.com 38 House Republicans Give Trump the Finger in Shutdown Vote

Speaker Mike Johnson “is f---ed,” one Republican lawmaker told the Beast earlier on Thursday.

Summary

A potential U.S. government shutdown looms after 38 House Republicans joined Democrats in rejecting a Trump-backed spending bill, which included a debt ceiling increase.

Trump derailed Speaker Mike Johnson’s initial bipartisan plan, causing GOP infighting and weakening Johnson’s leadership.

MAGA allies Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy rallied for a shutdown, angering GOP moderates.

The failure could furlough federal workers and disrupt holiday travel.

Frustration grows within the GOP over chaotic negotiations, foreshadowing future challenges under Trump’s second-term agenda.

You're viewing a single thread.

42 comments

A real mess. Happy Shutdown Day.
Washington Post: “One major reason 38 Republicans opposed the bill is because of the last-minute insertion to lift the debt limit. It’s a congressional requirement that is usually necessary every couple of years, but one that no Republican likes to do and many refuse to vote for.”
“Trump had been asking Johnson to lift the debt ceiling before he takes office, two House GOP sources familiar with the request said. But one of the sources said Johnson had been reluctant because he said he doesn’t have the votes.”
- because of the last-minute insertion to lift the debt limit
  Last minute? Wasn't that the whole intent?
  *Now that I'm taking the article:
  Trump threw Johnson a surprise curveball by demanding lawmakers increase the U.S. debt ceiling—an issue that previously had nothing to do with negotiations to avoid a government shutdown.
  
  The original intent was to fund the government. The debt ceiling is a much different thing.
  
  I thought it was funding the government by increasing the debt ceiling.
  
  The debt ceiling does not need to be increased to fund the government at this time. This was a Trump demand to suspend the debt limit 2 years.
  
  A limit increase is different from lifting the limit. The wording is admittedly quite similar, but lifting means removing completely. So this whole song and dance never happens again.
  
  Indeed; the debt limit forces Congress to show up for work and make decisions, including ones that aren’t politically expedient. If it is permanently lifted, the executive suddenly has an unlimited checking account, with limited accountability. Having that limit is what keeps congress in control of what gets done.
  
  I don't think having that limit realistically affects much other than government employees having to work unpaid for a while, but it is an area I feel like a compelling case could be made either way.
  
  Wouldn't that be removing the limit? To me "lifting the limit" means increasing it.
  
  I'm only stating what the facts are. Often as it relates to law "lift" has an alternative meaning of to remove. Sometimes you see it with "lifting a ban" or "lifting restrictions".
  
  Now that I read the article:
  Trump threw Johnson a surprise curveball by demanding lawmakers increase the U.S. debt ceiling—an issue that previously had nothing to do with negotiations to avoid a government shutdown.
  
  Thanks for that. The site doesn't load for me with my current settings, so I figured it was more of this: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-calls-abolishing-debt-ceiling-rcna184820

42 comments