Defund Obamacare, and the debt ceiling would include a delay of the health care law.
Actually, no. Republican's wanted to do this with no attachments at all. Obama said he would veto it, and Dems voted against the bill so he wouldn't have to. Obama said something along the lines of "We aren't playing these games, we will fund everything or none of it." I disagree with this. I think this is where they lost the moral high ground.
Please state optimally what it is that you would like Obama / blue team to do here. Because I am confused because I hear you saying he should have budged and then he shouldn't. Please enlighten me.
I would be happy to! Obama should have pushed spending bills that would fund important agencies to limit the damage done by the shutdown at midnight, like he did with military pay, with the stipulation that those bills would not include any changes to the ACA. This way, Democrats could take the position that they are working to help the American people despite Republican's best effort otherwise. Politically, I think this is a stronger position than going, 'look at all the damage Republicans caused.' I think Republican's ultimately know Obama isn't going to budge on the ACA. And while I have my doubts that it would work, Obama should have been negotiating concessions on the debt ceiling that was in no way tied to ACA to avoid a shutdown and get a "clean" CR (note, this isn't me blaming Obama for the shutdown). I have my doubts that it would work because I think a lot of House Republicans view this as an opportunity to show that they are trying to get rid of Obamacare and think it will get them reelected. I'm not sure if their belief is well founded or not.
Either way, I don't see this shutdown ending until the debt ceiling showdown in a couple weeks, and I would hope at least one of the parties wasn't using the pain and suffering of the American people as political capital in their childish arguments.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 3/10/13 21:04 (UTC)Actually, no. Republican's wanted to do this with no attachments at all. Obama said he would veto it, and Dems voted against the bill so he wouldn't have to. Obama said something along the lines of "We aren't playing these games, we will fund everything or none of it." I disagree with this. I think this is where they lost the moral high ground.
Please state optimally what it is that you would like Obama / blue team to do here. Because I am confused because I hear you saying he should have budged and then he shouldn't. Please enlighten me.
I would be happy to! Obama should have pushed spending bills that would fund important agencies to limit the damage done by the shutdown at midnight, like he did with military pay, with the stipulation that those bills would not include any changes to the ACA. This way, Democrats could take the position that they are working to help the American people despite Republican's best effort otherwise. Politically, I think this is a stronger position than going, 'look at all the damage Republicans caused.' I think Republican's ultimately know Obama isn't going to budge on the ACA. And while I have my doubts that it would work, Obama should have been negotiating concessions on the debt ceiling that was in no way tied to ACA to avoid a shutdown and get a "clean" CR (note, this isn't me blaming Obama for the shutdown). I have my doubts that it would work because I think a lot of House Republicans view this as an opportunity to show that they are trying to get rid of Obamacare and think it will get them reelected. I'm not sure if their belief is well founded or not.
Either way, I don't see this shutdown ending until the debt ceiling showdown in a couple weeks, and I would hope at least one of the parties wasn't using the pain and suffering of the American people as political capital in their childish arguments.