Congress has More Time to Avoid a Shutdown than Anyone is Admitting
Tomorrow is the supposed deadline for a deal to be developed that will prevent a federal government shutdown from occurring. Although current funding doesn't expire until the clock strikes midnight this Friday, the House this year imposed a rule on itself that requires all legislation to be available for three days before voting takes place. As a result, many people are saying an agreement is needed by COB Tuesday to prevent the government from shutting its doors.
But what few are forgetting is that a federal shutdown over the weekend would affect very few people. While there would be headlines and would lead the news, it would barely be noticed or cause many political ripples because most of the government offices and facilities that would be affected by a shutdown would be closed anyway.
As a result, although the people heading to a national park or the Smithsonian might be inconvenienced over the weekend, the real deadline for getting an agreement signed is next Monday morning. That effectively gives House Republicans, Senate Democrats, and the White House until COB Thursday rather than tomorrow to get their act together.
And it actually could be just a little bit longer. Chances are that federal workers will be told to report to work next Monday as usual if an agreement had been reached but the legislation isn't expected to be signed until later that day. That could mean that the House doesn't really need to have the CR drafted until Friday.
who cares
I am not afraid of this shutdown.
Bring it on.
To begin with, this "shutdown" is a joke. SS checks will be sent...
All people who matter stay on the job...
I remember the last "shutdown" - I could not tell a difference.
I would not know about it if not for the talking heads on TV.
This tells me something about the value of all those millions of people in government. I literally could not see any difference.
If the only way to balance the fed. budget is to have the gov. shutdown temporarily then so be it.
If it has to be this way - cut all programs proportionately.
It is not the best solution, but perhaps it will wake the politicos up.
Why?
Wes said: "f the only way to balance the fed. budget is to have the gov. shutdown temporarily then so be it."
What on Earth makes you think that a government shutdown will lead to a balanced budget?
The budget for which the GOP is fighting and willing to shutdown the government trims approx $60 billion. We have a $1.4 trillion deficit.
IIRC, the last time we had a shutdown, the costs of shutting down and then restarting exceeded the costs that would have been incurred had the government kept operating.
because
> What on Earth makes you think that a government shutdown
> will lead to a balanced budget?
Because this time this is coupled with debt limit extension.
no extension = instant balanced budget
1) No, it's not coupled with
1) No, it's not coupled with a debt limit extension.
and
2) Even if it were, no debt limit extension = spike in interest rates = massive increase in debt service costs = massive increase in long-term debt.
1. As long as some budget
1. As long as some budget negotiators believe it is coupled - it is coupled.
2. Another reason to have a balanced budget.
Shutdown idiocy
Yep, no extension = instant balanced budget = instant economic disaster
Good plan, Wes.
You think you don't care about or benefit from the federal government, but you'll find out differently if your side succeeds.
The Republican party has "jumped the shark," and it's greatly to the detriment of the country.
And the Democrats, ESPECIALLY the President, have lost all courage and go along with the idiocy. It's a pathetic discussion.
But I'm grateful for Stan Collender's always on-target and sensible observations and predictions -- wish he were running the country, sigh.
> and go along with the
> and go along with the idiocy
You seem to believe that having a balanced budget is idiocy. If this is what you think then something is seriously wrong with your thinking.
> Yep, no extension = instant balanced budget = instant economic disaster
Here we go again.
Balanced budget is not a disaster. It's what we should be aiming for.
Guideline to what actually happens?
Hi Stan,
I haven't been following this issue as closely as I should. Have you already posted a description of the sequence of events of how a shutdown might unfold, in particular when U.S. treasuries become risky, rather than "risk-free", securities?
Thanks,
Robert