Republican disarray in the House?
- Thread starter WATU2
- Start date
Too soon to tell what it means. My guess is it might mean that the current Speaker stays on through all of this. I still think...or maybe it's just a hope...that there will be some resolution. But even a compromise, like the sequester, isn't likely to please either side. This has been a crazy year and predicting it is like predicting snow storms in Oklahoma. Flip a coin.
I've been hearing some suggest that Tom Coburn would be a good choice for Speaker if he'd take it. Since the Speaker doesn't actually have to be a current elected member, I have to agree with them - he'd be great. But IMO he wouldn't accept that job. I get the idea he's had enough of both politics and Washington DC. BTW he's a Tulsan now so I'm sure he wouldn't care to move away from such a great place like this to such a corrupt dump back east. IMO.
They are saying the same thing about Newt. There are well over 200 Republicans in the House. Surely one is qualified and will want the job. Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers might work. They are trying to get Paul Ryan to take it. He would unite the GOP.
Last edited:
Nah, they're way behind, they're in a bind, they're willing to make a deal.
Nobody wants a job herding cats. You have a majority that is made up of two groups with different world views. If both sides can't agree on a Speaker, then Nancy Pelosi becomes the leader. Ryan is weakening. He is happy at Ways and Means. But probably he will take the corner office and the raise in pay. Rep. Cathy Rodgers could also get a enough votes. A lot of posturing going on now but they aren't going to let Pelosi win. Heck, Ryan would lose his chairmanship then anyway.
Last I heard is Ryan will be taking the weekend to decide if he will consider it or not. So I assume its not settled in his mind completely which way to go. As in the movie D @ D "so there's a chance?!".
what does it hurt if the government is shut down for a few days? They always have the Essential people report for work, and the non-essential people stay home. This happens several time a year during winter snow storms in the DC area.
Hi. I work at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Through an accident of history, I am not a federal employee, but an employee of a shell corporation which is owned by the University of California. I, and everyone else here, am a federal contractor, and am not subject to backpay during a shutdown. But all of our funding is federal, and we shut down when the government does.
Pretty much the only "essential" government employees around here are the security details that guard the plutonium. 99% of us, and the same is true for almost every government agency that I know of, are "non-essential". Non-essential doesn't mean expendable or optional in this context, it just means that the nation won't immediately collapse into anarchy in our absence. It's really only a tiny few that are "essential". Meanwhile, massive 100 million dollar computer systems don't exactly turn off like a light switch or like to be neglected, expensive and time consuming experiments are interrupted and may need to be started over again from scratch, everyone is furloughed, morale goes into the toilet, and recruitment of good talent becomes more difficult.
So when you say, "what does it hurt if the government shuts down for a few days", what you are really saying is, "Who cares if we furlough clong83a without pay for no good reason right before Christmas. Who cares that he has a wife that will be 8 and a half months pregnant at that time? Who cares if morale at LANL, NASA, and everywhere else goes down the toilet and America can no longer find good scientists willing to work for such a capricious employer?"
Please think carefully before you post any response.
I didn't write the comment you are responding to but you are a good addition to what I call the basement...crossfire that is. I sincerely hope there is no shutdown. I would think that calm people on both sides of the aisle can reach some kind of a compromise. Usually, no one is entirely happy with a compromise but that very much needs to happen.
I also understand that with technology some things don't go down and come back up like flipping a light switch.
I also understand that with technology some things don't go down and come back up like flipping a light switch.
We need to be aware that when someone works for the federal govt they are still a part of the US economy and can be "let go" if a program is cut due to funding or lack of need. Its done all the time in the private sector here.
We aren't Greece. An "essential" job to them is an activity they can under-perform from the their reclined position on a hammock.
We aren't Greece. An "essential" job to them is an activity they can under-perform from the their reclined position on a hammock.
Rabid, I totally disagree with what you are saying. Yes jobs do go away in the private sector. Mine did. But that's not what is being discussed here. What is being discussed is a dumb shutdown that can occur when the bosses [Congressional parties and the President] have an argument. I agree that there is bloating in government and if we were talking about that fine. But both parties have two months to resolve some sort of a budget. Both parties, including the President try to draw lines in the sand.
I was actually replying to another post on the thread about "essential" jobs in the govt. IMO about the only essential jobs in the govt are the "responders", primarily in the military, but of course those employees seem be the first to be "cut back" IMO.
I should never post while being distracted.
I should never post while being distracted.
I was actually replying to another post on the thread about "essential" jobs in the govt. IMO about the only essential jobs in the govt are the "responders", primarily in the military, but of course those employees seem be the first to be "cut back" IMO.
I should never post while being distracted.
Just for your information, I have worked in the private sector. Petroleum industry. My job there dried up. So I know about layoffs, cancelled projects, etc. I can deal with that and land on my own two feet while not complaining. I've done it before, more than once. Believe it or not, despite the stereotypes of cushy and permanent government jobs, the same types of things happen at LANL. Projects get cancelled, departments reorganized, and people scramble to latch on to some other project or they leave. As you say, it happens all the time. That is NOT what I am complaining about.
Since you seem to have missed it, my point was that regardless of your own opinion of Los Alamos (or any other government agency/department), the US Congress generally supports us. None of my funding streams were on the chopping block this year. The dispute du jour is instead over a relatively trivial amount of funding for Planned Parenthood, which I don't honestly give two hoots about. For a private sector analogy, it is tantamount to the Board of Directors of Microsoft deciding to furlough everyone until further notice, costs, deadlines, and employee's well-being be damned, while they sort out a dispute over whether they should provide contraceptives in their health care plan or not. It's just insane.
Thanks, TuME. You and me both on the shutdown...
I enjoy reading your posts as well. I also think both sides have forgotten the old axiom, "A good compromise leaves everyone unhappy".
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
🏀 Recruiting TU signee Tyler Behrend discusses his long road to D-1 basketball
- Latest: chito_and_leon
-