Senator introduces the Stop STUPIDITY Act to permanently end shutdowns
28 replies, posted
https://www.13newsnow.com/article/news/politics/sen-warner-introduced-bill-to-end-future-government-shutdowns/291-6398cc5d-b67a-4263-a48a-a530fe76fda6
WASHINGTON — Virginia's U.S. Senator Mark Warner has introduced legislation Tuesday that would end future government shutdowns. The bill would also protect federal workers from
being used during policy negotiations. The legislation is called Stop STUPIDITY (Shutdowns Transferring Unnecessary Pain and Inflicting Damage In The Coming Years) Act.
“The Stop STUPIDITY Act takes the aggressive but necessary step of forcing the President and Congress to do the jobs they were elected to do,” said Sen. Warner. “It is disturbing that
the daily lives of hundreds of thousands of workers are at the mercy of dysfunction in Washington. Workers, business owners and tax payers are currently paying the price of D.C.
gridlock and my legislation will put an end to that.”
The Act would keep the government running in the case of a lapse in funding by automatically renewing government funding at the same levels as the previous year. The Act would
fund every area of the government except for the legislative branch and the Executive Office of the President.
This will force Congress and the White House to come to the negotiating table without putting at risk the economy or hurting the American public.
I love the American way of thinking of the acronym before the actual name.
This is a change we really need. In the US triggering a shutdown is a means of holding the people hostage for political gain. In other nations, it's a way of making sure you lose your job.
Because of the 27th Amendment this probably wouldn't go into effect until 2021
Sadly the catchier a bill's name is, the easier it is to win over public support from low-information voters, of which the US is full of.
Look at the PATRIOT Act. Deeply chilling effects, but how can you vote against a law named PATRIOT? Are you some kind of pinko commie or something? The acronym-first method is often paired with "Bill does the opposite of what it sounds" syndrome. Hopefully not this one, though.
Also it should be the STUPIDITCY Act, which is the appropriate level of stupiditcy I expect out of the US Congress at this point.
Sadly, I bet the first thing we'll hear from the Senate is McConnell saying "there aren't enough votes" so he won't even bother allowing the bill to come up for a vote. He won't even let it fail in a vote because Republican Senators who voted against ending shutdowns would be on the record and accountable for their voting. This is how snowflakey the Republican Party has become, they won't even own up to their principles in public and are killing bills by simply neglecting to acknowledge them legislatively, because McConnell can just make up an excuse for preemptively killing the bill. And he won't dare let anything that would pass go through if it will humiliate Trump, and spoilers there is no way to end this shutdown without either humiliating Trump or rewarding him for taking hostages by giving him what he wants and the House Democrats have zero incentive to let him walk right over them after they inherited the shutdown from Paul "I had my spine surgically reimplanted when I got home from Washington" Ryan.
Will Republicans get behind this though?
Too many of them are cool with using shutdowns as leverage since they're insulated from the harm they cause and are often of the mind that these jobs shouldn't be done by the government anyway.
I don't imagine that Trump would sign off on this in particular.
Backronyms are great
They won't get the chance. McConnell will never let that bill go to the Senate floor. It's Dead on Arrival.
If it gets enough support in the House, it'll make McConnell look very bad when he stops it from reaching the Senate.
McConnell really doesn't care how bad he looks. I mean, just look at him. There's a man who has simply learned not to care and bury all his feelings deep into the pile of money he throws himself into every night with a tiny little turtle smile that only hides that he knows it only stops a little of the pain temporarily.
okay that's a good fucking name
Is it just me or does the US government like to burn their hands on things they could have fixed if though about it sooner? It isn't the first time a simple solution as like as using the last funding rates again is treated like some high end innovations. As far as I know, a funding plan is reused until it is replaced by a new one in like every civilized country. Not passing a new funding plan must not cause a lockdown of a country. At worst it should be a little inconvenient as it would cause the funding to be spend less efficient (the point of that whole voting and passing thing?) as intended.
But better a bit more dept is the budget than a locked down government/country. Simple as it get: Just use the old one instead of no one.
The entire concept of the shutdown started with the 1976 Antideficiency Act, it's a manufactured issue, but neither party has gotten around to fixing it.
the fuck is this, the simpsons?
Does this bill address the possible abuse that could result from continuing to use the existing budget? As far as I understand we don’t specifically allocate government funds on a month to month basis instead they get a lump sum of money at the start of they year and are told heres your budget. So would this bill make it so if they can’t decide on a new budget we just use the current one for another year? If not I could see how there could be problems without a more comprehensive overhaul to the government budget allocating the money over a set period of time instead of all at once in a lump sum.
removing pay from a branch sounds great for voters but the protections preventing that are because kings of old and the nobility can literally starve people out of their job.
He has a thirty year history of looking bad, and it hasn't changed anything.
Better idea of equal hard as fuck to pass status:
Add an examination branch of government that is required to for you to go through before you are allowed a federal position in the house and congress. This examination branch essentially would hand out a test similar to the BAR exams except a bit more civic duty minded. The board is elected for life and is given the ability to maintain a cabinet.
Note that the House GOP voted to pass a temporary appropriation bill as a stopgap last Thursday, but Democrats went against it. (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll043.xml)
What do you mean?
Where can I find more information about what is included in this bill? I'd wager a guess that it included border wall funding and failed because of that, but I can't tell because those links don't tell me that information.
Goddamn, I immediately thought of that Pan's Labyrinth monster.
If a bill benefits Russia, it will pass. If it doesn't, it won't.
Look into it...
It was Churchill who said "You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing after they have tried everything else."
And it's so fucking true
I gave you the link to the bill... It literally just extends the date of a previous extension. That's it. Nothing about the wall, border funding, etc. It just pays government workers.
They refused a motion to recommit, they didn't refuse to pass it. Yet.
The motion to recommit provides one final opportunity for the House to debate and amend a measure, typically after the engrossment and third reading of the bill, before the Speaker orders the vote on final passage. ... The motion does not delay or kill the bill.
Reading all the actions involved in H.J. Res 28 and H.J. Res. 27 (which is the same thing as far as I can tell) you didn't even link the correct resolution. There was some vote to suspend some rules and pass the resolution that got a majority but failed to get the 2/3rds majority, after which the normal vote went on and it failed. Also H.J. Res 28 wasn't rejected, they postponed voting on it until the 23rd to "revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration".
From what I can tell from the transcripts Dems are opposed to it because it doesn't actually end the shutdown and would give Trump and the Republicans further chances to continue to force the border wall into the budget.
Yeah I knew there was something fishy going on here. If it had been as simple as Sgman91 implied, it would have passed with democrats just fine.
It's been dems position since before the shutdown to reopen the government without any catches.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
