The alternative would be a much faster replacement of the non-essential workforce. I’m not defending it. I’m stating Schumer’s reasoning because I’m sick of people painting it as if we somehow had full control of a situation and gave it away. It’s just not that simple.
I’m not. I’m saying it was a lose/lose. People who make it seem like leverage don’t understand the effects of a shutdown and how the EO would allow Trump to complete that massive step in no time.
I’m not a fan of Schumer, or any centrists for that matter. Every candidate besides Schumer and Gillibrand dropped out before the primary. I’m hoping AOC runs a NY Senate bid in 2028 so we can finally get the deadwood out.
I wholeheartedly wanted to understand your opinion. I’m no fan of Schumer. Everyone withdrew but him and Gillibrand in the primary, so I didn’t have much of a choice. Regardless, he’s my Senator, and I message and call his office often. I appreciate your point about the EO. At the end of the day, it really is no different than the others being challenged in court. That’s a valid point I’ll be taking up with his office later today. Thank you for taking the time to explain your perspective. Sorry if I frustrated you.
Those terminations are either of probationary employees (less than two years in role), or are currently being challenged by the courts. Project 2025 outlines a complete replacement of all hired federal employees with loyalists.
I understand the riders aren’t temporary, but the budget itself is. That means there will be another chance at a shutdown in September. I don’t need you to explain how this works. I need you to explain why you think it’s a better choice to give Trump the ability to indiscriminately terminate non-essential government employees than to have control of the budget. It’s your opinion that I find elusive, not the facts.
This isn’t a popularity contest. Handing Trump the ability to indiscriminately terminate non-essential government employees under EO 14210 would expedite Project 2025. It was a lose/lose situation.
So you agree that it’s temporary? Isn’t that the point you challenged?
Again, it is not a lie. EO 14210 provides Trump with the ability to terminate non-essential government employees if any of three conditions are not met, and funding is one of them.
Read it for yourself: https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/don-t-use-shutdown-plans-to-slash-the-federal-workforce
What loss alone? Again, be specific. The alternative was a shutdown.
Then why does this only fund the government through September, rather than the full calendar?
Not at all. My point is we have a chance to replace these people every two or four years in the primaries, but only ~20% of us actually vote in them.
False. You need to learn the difference between a continuing resolution and a budget reconciliation bill.
https://www.pgpf.org/article/what-is-a-continuing-resolution/
There was no leverage to extract concessions from the minority without inducing a shutdown. I just wish they all openly discussed this and voted together. People are more upset by the appearance of dissent than the choice made given the available options.
They’re doing plenty more than this, but they’re not self-promoting enough for people to notice. Democrats voted and spoke out against Trump’s cabinet nominations, forced a 15-day vote against Trump’s executive order, confirmed Biden’s pending judicial appointments when Republican attendance is low, and are the ones bringing these cases to the courts.
This is to obstruct fast-tracked appointments by Trump according to C-SPAN. Other than that, you’re right.
The Democrats forced a 15-day vote against Trump’s emergency executive order, and Republicans redefined the entire congressional calendar as a single day, just to avoid holding the vote.
Every last Republican in Congress is complicit.
Only if the Republicans in Congress weren’t too chickenshit to actually put their names on these actions. Trump is doing everything by executive order.
You don’t understand what a CR is if you think it’s permanent. A continuing resolution is stopgap funding when a budget reconciliation fails to be passed.
Read the link I provided. It explains how Trump’s existing executive order grants him the ability to refuse return on non-essential employees under three conditions. A lack of funding is one of them.
As for why he didn’t veto, I honestly don’t know. It’s a good question. Maybe he’s trying to win his indiscriminate termination hearings in appeal first? He’ll have another chance in September, since the CR is temporary.
What do you mean “rubber stamp everything?” Sensationalism is very unhelpful to people who prefer to pay attention to the actions of our government.
The dilemma with passing this budget is choosing between giving temporary funding to the corrupt administration, or shutting down non-essential departments allowing Trump to terminate any and all non-essential government employees.
I’m all for criticism of poor choices, but this was a lose/lose. Neither option was good for the nation.
That’s what his assistant told me when I demanded an explanation for his dissent. Now I need to confirm if that’s true. I’m going to flip out when I call later if they fucking lied to me!
Edit: It appears to be true. A lack of funding would justify large scale reduction in force in accordance with Trump’s Executive Order 14210. I’m still going to ask for details when I call later.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/don-t-use-shutdown-plans-to-slash-the-federal-workforce
I didn’t watch Rubio’s confirmation hearing, so thanks for the correction.
He’s ignoring injunctions, not rulings. He can only be held in contempt of court until the cases have been ruled.
I’m not lying, but I may be uninformed. What I else could they be doing from the minority? I’ll add it to the list when I call and message my Representative and Senator.
We get ~20% turnout in congressional primaries, yet people call for term limits. Either stump and vote for better representation or accept that these people are at least trying to stop the nation from burning down. Apathy or actionless criticism will get us nowhere.
Thanks! That was a well written breakdown for sure. The irony is I really dislike Schumer. Everyone else dropped out of the primary, so he was mo only option. I’m even less fond of defending a moderate standpoint, but I’ll advocate for fact over opinion, and this was simply not the leverage people make it out to be.