Nuke the filibuster for shutdowns?

[kyzr]

Maybe SS is finally being shown to be as unsustainable as the ACA. Maybe a new program that takes the same contributions and put them in a personal account for the recipient to be drawn at retirement is a better idea than allowing a bloated gov't bureaucracy to control it. Just a suggestion.

People are living much longer than they used to when everyone smoked. SS has been "fixed" several times since its inception way back in 1935. Birthrates are declining, so your suggestion has to happen for the young. But, we old folks paid into the system all our lives, the surplus was used by the government under the Unified Budget, and IOUs put there. Now its time to pay up. They can eliminate the cap, raise the top tax rate to 40%, eliminate the Capital Gains tax break (income is income), use tariff revenue, or any combination that makes SS whole.

 

[Concerned American]

People are living much longer than they used to when everyone smoked. SS has been "fixed" several times since its inception way back in 1935. Birthrates are declining, so your suggestion has to happen for the young. But, we old folks paid into the system all our lives, the surplus was used by the government under the Unified Budget, and IOUs put there. Now its time to pay up. They can eliminate the cap, raise the top tax rate to 40%, eliminate the Capital Gains tax break (income is income), use tariff revenue, or any combination that makes SS whole.

I am aware and I point to all of your very valid points when I say that it is unsustainable. I paid into it my whole life as well but I said in my 30s that the gov't could keep every penny I put into it, to that time, if they would let me have a portable account that would take its place. If something like that ever happens there will be pain---kind of like getting yourself out of excessive debt, but I think it would be more sustainable.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The $35b subsidies can be paid for by cuts in spending as identified by DOGE, as well as claw-backs of democrat slush funds.

Clinton Foundation Timeline

We are doggedly investigating and chronicling the Clinton Foundation, Email and Dossier scandals.

www.clintonfoundationtimeline.com

The $42 billion internet program that has connected 0 people

The federal BEAD program makes little sense with the rate of private markets providing internet access.

www.washingtonpolicy.org

So no healthcare insurance and no Medicaid, so who gets stuck with the bill?

They should be thankful that they are making so much income.
Otherwise we could just raise the top tax rate to 40%, and eliminate the capital gains tax break to make SS whole from the IOUs given when the SS surplus was stolen under the "Unified Budget".

Taxes are always progressive. SS needs to be made whole, one way or another.

make SS whole from the IOUs given when the SS surplus was stolen under the "Unified Budget".

Tell me you're clueless without just admitting you're clueless.

The surplus bought Treasury debt. Which pays interest.

 

[kyzr]

make SS whole from the IOUs given when the SS surplus was stolen under the "Unified Budget".
Tell me you're clueless without just admitting you're clueless.
The surplus bought Treasury debt. Which pays interest.

Fine, but SS is insolvent in 2033 unless it is fixed. That is a default. I misunderstood what the "Unified Budget" meant, I read this 3x and it still sounds like the SS surplus was spent and IOUs put there.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Fine, but SS is insolvent in 2033 unless it is fixed. That is a default. I misunderstood what the "Unified Budget" meant, I read this 3x and it still sounds like the SS surplus was spent and IOUs put there.

View attachment 1178019

Fine, but SS is insolvent in 2033 unless it is fixed. That is a default.

Indeed. There needs to be some sort of private account put in place.
Start off with a low percentage and decade by decade increase the amount until
the government isn't involved beyond managing the private accounts.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Fine, but SS is insolvent in 2033 unless it is fixed. That is a default. I misunderstood what the "Unified Budget" meant, I read this 3x and it still sounds like the SS surplus was spent and IOUs put there.

View attachment 1178019

I read this 3x and it still sounds like the SS surplus was spent and IOUs put there.

Unified budget or not, the government took the surplus and invested it in government bonds (IOUs). Always.

That's better than putting a pile of $20s in a vault and earning no interest on them.

 

[task0778]

Fine, but SS is insolvent in 2033 unless it is fixed. That is a default.

Indeed. There needs to be some sort of private account put in place.
Start off with a low percentage and decade by decade increase the amount until
the government isn't involved beyond managing the private accounts.

Not sure that default is the right word to use. Once the SSA Trust Fund runs out of gov't IOUs, the SSA will still payout SS checks to beneficiaries, but it'll be like 75% of what it was before. Unless the gov't takes steps sooner or later to fund the program shortfall between revenue and payouts. Which is doable, but probably painful for somebody.

 

[BackAgain]

Sorry, to be clear, they need to do their jobs and pass actual budgets, thus making the issue moot.

I agree. But I’m not sure how to make them bind themselves to doing what they refuse to do.

If the deficits keep expanding, it may come to that, whether we want to or not.

Again, I agree. I have posted here (way long ago) an argument that these insane deficits are a national security threat, citing some now forgotten think piece.

Since it is pretty clear (at least to me) that our current generation of Representatives and Senators lack the willingness to do what responsible statesmanlike politicians are supposed to do (including imposing a strict requirement on themselves to pass a budget on time), we need a Convention of States.

 

[BULLDOG]

The House isn't even in session. The senate votes and democrats stop the CR. Totally ridiculous.
The only work that needs to be done is to change the senate rules for CRs, Appropriations, and Rescissions, so that the BBB budget items can all be passed as the election results dictated.

Then get on with governing.

Pass Trumpcare, the ACA with subsidies paid for by the DOGE savings and tariff revenue.
Then fix SS & Medicare.

Explain trumpcare. He promised it long ago, but failed to deliver.

 

[BackAgain]

The case for Martial Law is there.

WE are under attack from

1. millions of criminal illegals

I question the number of criminal illegals. Many don’t commit any crimes here. Unless you mean all illegal aliens are already criminals because of how they entered or remained here

2. ANTIFA

They merit an invocation of already existing Emegency laws allowing the President to order the military to assist in their apprehension. But I don’t need to live under martial law. I’m guessing that you don’t either. Especially when it isn’t needed.

3. drug gangs

a law enforcement issue. Not a martial law matter

4. trade war adversaries, overwhelmingly China

Again. A substantive problem. Not a martial law matter.

To shut the government down now is to endanger America.

In some ways, that may be true. In many ways, it is not true in my estimation.

That by itself justifies Martial Law.

No. Martial Law is truly supposed to be limited to the purpose for which it is contemplated at all in our Constitutional republic.

 

[kyzr]

Explain trumpcare. He promised it long ago, but failed to deliver.

The democrats sunset the ACA subsidies at the end of 2025, not Republicans.

44m Americans are currently covered under the ACA with the subsidy.

Since US families lost $11,400 in buying power during Biden's runaway inflation, a significant ACA increase would be crushing.
If the subsidy was extended for 2026 it would cost $35b. TRUMPCARE could be the permanent extension of the $35b subsidy, paid for by implementing the DOGE savings, plus the "claw-back" via rescission, of the democrat slush-funds, such as:

$375B EPA slush fund handled by John Podesta gave billions to charities founded only months earlier

By Isabel Vincent The Biden administration funneled at least $20 billion dollars into environmental groups, most of which had only recently been founded, The Post has discovered. In one case, forme…

www.climatedepot.com

The $42 billion internet program that has connected 0 people

The federal BEAD program makes little sense with the rate of private markets providing internet access.

www.washingtonpolicy.org

Plus, as Rand Paul explained, that people need to be able to buy policies from anyone in the US, such as Costco, Walmart, or any provider. Plus any other good ideas.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The democrats sunset the ACA subsidies at the end of 2025, not Republicans.

44m Americans are currently covered under the ACA with the subsidy.

View attachment 1178094

Since US families lost $11,400 in buying power during Biden's runaway inflation, a significant ACA increase would be crushing.
If the subsidy was extended for 2026 it would cost $35b. TRUMPCARE could be the permanent extension of the $35b subsidy, paid for by implementing the DOGE savings, plus the "claw-back" via rescission, of the democrat slush-funds, such as:

$375B EPA slush fund handled by John Podesta gave billions to charities founded only months earlier

By Isabel Vincent The Biden administration funneled at least $20 billion dollars into environmental groups, most of which had only recently been founded, The Post has discovered. In one case, forme…

www.climatedepot.com

The $42 billion internet program that has connected 0 people

The federal BEAD program makes little sense with the rate of private markets providing internet access.

www.washingtonpolicy.org

Plus, as Rand Paul explained, that people need to be able to buy policies from anyone in the US, such as Costco, Walmart, or any provider. Plus any other good ideas.

44m Americans are currently covered under the ACA with the subsidy.

A lot of the 44 million are covered under the Medicaid expansion.

 

[TemplarKormac]

#thinblueline #lawenforcement | Kyle Reyes | 111 comments

I TOTALLY agree! WATCH as Sen. John Fetterman calls on Republicans to “nuke”the filibuster... but only in cases of the government shutting down. That means it would no longer would require 60 votes to remain open. REPOST if you agree! #thinblueline #lawenforcement | 111 comments on LinkedIn

www.linkedin.com

Does this Fetterman proposal make sense to you?

It does to me.

No. You will instantly regret that the moment Reps go out of power again.

 

[BackAgain]

No. You will instantly regret that the moment Reps go out of power again.

I understand the argument. But, I’m not so pleased with the minority Party basically calling the shots, either,

 

[TemplarKormac]

I understand the argument. But, I’m not so pleased with the minority Party basically calling the shots, either,

Then there needs to be some sort of failsafe mechanism. Introduce a bill that would nuke it if a shutdown lasted so many days. It should require the party in power to restore normal rules when the government reopens

 

[Slyhunter]

Ending the filibuster means no way to stop the majority from adding judges to SCOTUS, no way to stop adding socialist states to our union, no way to stop changes to our constitution maybe even the obliteration of any of our fist 10 amendments.

Do you really want that?
Do you want it to be the Republicans fault that it happened?
Of course what if the Democrats are willing to allow all the poor to starve if we don't.
Damned if we do ...

 

[BackAgain]

Then there needs to be some sort of failsafe mechanism. Introduce a bill that would nuke it if a shutdown lasted so many days. It should require the party in power to restore normal rules when the government reopens

Not sure how that would help. If the minority party can just wait it out, then they win simply by being stubborn.

As for the pros and cons of a filibuster, I’m indecisive. Post #96 by Slyhunter makes some good points.

Of course, it has its good points, too. Besides, who’s to say the other side won’t donut just because we refrain?

 

[ozro]

The question I have is the current CR was supposed to give these knuckleheads 7 weeks to hammer out an actual budget, or something they would call a budget.
It is becoming quite obvious that nothing like that is going to happen in approximately 3 weeks.

So my question is what happens next. It appears to me that no agreement on anything can be reached by these worthless excuses for representatives and pretender senators. Can we expect nothing but more bickering and name-calling until after the midterm elections? I believe this is all the current crop of inbred morons is capable of.

Don't get me wrong, I like deadlock. In my opinion the best congress is a do-nothing congress. However, I realize that may not be in the best interests of the country.

I can offer a few suggestions, if that indeed the immediate future of our congress:

1) The option of peace is to just shut it down. Turn out the lights, lock the doors and post guards at every entrance.

2)The amusing but violent option would be a boon to the gambling industry is to give every congress member, representatives and senators a club. A club to match their size, weighted in the business end. Set a time and place, and only what's left of one side leaves.

3) Pick a day in early December, call it "citizens day". Organize as many citizens as are interested in such things, and proceed to drag them out one at a time and hang them. (without regard to party) Leave the carcasses hanging as a warning to others that run for office but lack the capability to perform the job.

Any and all other suggestions are welcome......

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ending the filibuster means no way to stop the majority from adding judges to SCOTUS, no way to stop adding socialist states to our union, no way to stop changes to our constitution maybe even the obliteration of any of our fist 10 amendments.

Do you really want that?
Do you want it to be the Republicans fault that it happened?
Of course what if the Democrats are willing to allow all the poor to starve if we don't.
Damned if we do ...

Ending the filibuster means no way to stop the majority from adding judges to SCOTUS,

After the Dems ended it for Obama appointees, the Republicans ended it for SCOTUS.

 

[toobfreak]

Thune is afraid to use the nuclear option because he believes if Democrats get control of the Senate it will come back to bite the GOP.

Think about that--- what a political advantage for the Democrats if they can refuse any budget and force a long shutdown culminating in the GOP pulling the nuclear option in the 11th hour to save the country!

Not only would the Dems spin that throughout the media as this terrible, fascist attempt at a Trump takeover, but it would forever release the Dems from any political hay as then they would immediately do it right back, in "retaliation."

Gotta fight fire with fire you know, it's all for the children.

And once the Dems were back in power with that nuke option, they would go to town with it.