What happened? The GOP-controlled Senate passed a bill by voice-call in the late hours of December 19 with measures that would have provided enough funding for the government to continue functioning into the early part of February. This bill did not have money allocated for a border wall that President Trump had repeatedly stated Mexico would pay for. It was expected this Senate bill would pass overwhelmingly in the House. However, the next day under the GOP-controlled House, former House Speaker Paul Ryan announced that the President would not sign any bill that lacked funds for the border wall. Later that night, the House passed a spending bill (all Democrats and 8 GOP opposed) which did include partial funding for the wall. This would have averted the third government shutdown under the tenure of President Trump. This attempt failed, as it didn’t pass the GOP-controlled Senate.
The original bi-partisan Senate bill would have presumably passed the House with bi-partisan support and gone to the President. However, a Presidential veto of a fully GOP-endorsed funding measure would only make the Administration look worse because the legislature would have had enough votes with the Democrats to override the veto, so neither bill made it to the Oval Office. Consequently, we are now in the nation’s longest government shutdown.
What makes this a government “showdown”?
As far as I can tell, nothing makes this a showdown between the Republicans and Democrats. The Republicans theoretically had the votes to achieve any legislation they would have liked, including border wall funding, prior to losing control of the House. President Trump had urged Senator McConnell to go “nuclear” to achieve funding for his border wall. The “Nuclear Option” can be used to expedite the passage of bills in the Senate by requiring only 51 votes instead of the traditional 60 votes. Fifty-one votes should not have been difficult to achieve under a Republican majority. In other words, the GOP could have done it, but they didn’t. Which begs the question, why not? Perhaps because they recognize a wall at the U.S./Mexico border would effectively be an unpopular land-grab by the Federal Government, or perhaps because 7 in 10 Americans oppose the government being shutdown over the border wall dispute.
Would a wall be effective and what is it trying to accomplish?
Will it stop illegal immigration? No. Most illegal immigrants enter the U.S. legally and overstay visas. Will it stop drugs? No. Most drugs come through legal ports of entry. Will it stop terrorists? No. To give the appearance of credibility to the functionality of the wall, the Trump Administration falsely stated nearly 4,000 “known or suspected terrorists” were stopped at the border. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security, (ironically hobbled by the government shutdown) issued a report on January 7 to set the record straight.
Meanwhile, FBI leaders, intelligence agents, private industries, and major airlines have all stated the shutdown itself threatens national security. Airport security is weakened with fewer TSA officers, scientific research and public health loses vital funding, food inspections and oversight are hampered, and many federal law enforcement officers go without pay, as does the judiciary (Law and Order).
The President has closed the government over $5.7 billion not just for an ineffective wall, but for what can only be an incomplete wall. Two reports estimate much higher costs for the wall, not including technology or staffing needed. Homeland Security estimated the wall would cost closer to $22 billion. According to MIT engineers, the wall would cost taxpayers $27-$40 billion.
The notion that our southern border is a national security threat isn’t to be taken lightly. In 2014, the U.S. Department of Defense highlighted an immediate threat to this nation’s national security, climate change. If the President of the United States sets a precedent by declaring a national emergency to get funding for a wall, then what will stop a more liberal president in the future from declaring Climate Change as a national security threat?
This dysfunction appears to be between the President and his own party, not simply a Republican vs. Democrat scenario.
I can only hope that by the time you’re reading this the shutdown will be over.
Cheers.
Sources:
Senate Passes Bill: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-won-apos-t-sign-172050494.html
House Passes Bill: https://www.npr.org/2018/12/20/678602214/senate-approves-temporary-funding-bill-house-likely-to-act-today-avoiding-shutdo
Security threat: https://www.businessinsider.com/delta-united-jetblue-pilots-warn-of-flying-dangers-during-shutdown-2019-1
FBI agents say shutdown is risk: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/01/fbi-agents-say-shutdown-threatens-national-security/580039/
Ipsos/NPR Poll: https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/Government-Shutdown
Most illegal immigrants overstay visa: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/25/most-immigrants-who-enter-the-country-do-so-legally-federal-data-show/?utm_term=.5146a213a605
Longest shutdown ever: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/01/09/us/politics/longest-government-shutdown.html
Nuclear Option: https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/as-shutdown-looms-trump-calls-for-nuclear-option-to-get-wall-funding-passed-by-senate/
MIT cost of Wall: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602494/bad-math-props-up-trumps-border-wall/
Most drugs through legal ports: https://www.factcheck.org/2017/08/will-trumps-wall-stop-drug-smuggling/
Trump declines Graham: https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/10/republican-senators-government-shutdown-1096118
Climate Change immediate risk: https://unfccc.int/news/climate-change-threatens-national-security-says-pentagon
Jeffrey Erding says
@Aaron Bishop, sorry, I didn’t comment on your submission…. mainly because I don’t want people blaming me for another boring lecture on Global Warming/Climate change with a list of sources as long as your arm that no one will look at anyhow. Kim and Hawkeye will have to share the blame for that!
Trust me, most people are smart enough to realize that: a) Climate always changes. We need sound policy for the environment but we can’t stop climate from changing.
b) There are a lot of important things going on that we as citizens can actually influence, like the trend toward euthanasia, the stupidity of legalizing pot, tax dollars funneled through phony daycare facilities and sent to terrorist organizations, voter fraud, illegal immigration, etc.
But I get why you focus on climate change…. it’s the last best hope for the Democrat party to convince people to keep voting for their candidates.
Good Luck!
Aaron Bishop says
Ah, my mistake! I had just read through the article addressed to you before replying here and your name somehow stuck in my head. It was indeed supposed to be a response to Hawkeye. That said, I can now also thank you for responding and providing good topics to bring up.
Cheers!
Thomas E.H. says
@ Jeff
Could you respond to my post from the article by Ruth Franke? I see you missed it! Or perhaps ignored?
Thomas E.H. says
@ Jeff
I’d like to see that list of sources you claim! Also please respond my post from Ruth Franke’s article. Did you miss it? Or ignore it?
Thomas E.H. says
@ Jeff
Blimey! Double posted! I imagine you picked up on that.
Aaron Bishop says
Jeff Erding and Kim Wentworth,
Thank you both for providing questions and comments regarding my article. I’m currently on vacation, so I apologize for not responding at all, let alone promptly.
I do plan to address some of your claims in an upcoming article.
Thank you for your patience.
Cheers!
Hawkeye63 says
@ERL, You and George are obviously among those who completely misunderstand President Trump and those who support him.
The end of the shut down was not a victory for Pelosi and Democrats. It was a recognition on the part of the President that no amount of suffering by government workers and others due to the shutdown would bring Democrats to the table to negotiate in good faith. As a pragmatist and logical problem solver, he recognized that Pelosi and her fellow Democrats cared more about politics then they do about the welfare of American citizens.
President Trump has accepted the fact that Congress is incapable of making prudent decisions regarding border security. No one can say he didn’t try his best to get Congressional cooperation. He recognized the futility of prolonging the suffering of American workers. I’m proud of him for his logical approach, and feel sure he will take actions appropriate to his oath of office and defend our country and it’s sovereignty.
As far as causing a future Democratic POTUS to use executive power on Global Warming, that Genie was already dumped 8from the bottle during the Obama regime. Mr. Obama shut down pipeline construction, closed all Federal lands to energy exploration or increased production, forbid new refinery construction and upgrades to existing ones, and used every tool he had to shut down fossil fuel energy production. Your argument is as leaky as a bean can that has spent a saturday afternoon as a target at the gun range.
@ George, thanks but no thanks for the Snopes reference. They are just as reliable a source as CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the lying, biased, bigoted main stream media… which is to say not at all! Harvard University’s recent study proved that.
George says
“Insignificant human beings” putting hundreds of millions of years worth of fossil fuels into the earth’s atmosphere, which comparatively is like the skin on an apple, in just 150 years. How could that do anything?
Hawkeye63 says
Hey George, CO2 levels in the past have been at over 1000 ppm, far in excess of the current 450 ppm.
When volcanoes erupt, CO2 is introduced at rates that make amounts produced by man look tiny. The eruption of Mt. Pinitubo produced more CO2 in 3 days than Man has produced since the dawn of time.
If you have data to refute any of the facts stated above, please share them. The USA has already achieved an 80% reduction in carbon output. No other country has come close to doing that. How about we let the rest of the world catch up before we sacrifice more billions of taxpayer dollars to the radical environmentalist Gods?
George says
Here is some data. Have fun and be sure to consult with Alex Jones.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/volcano-carbon-emissions/
Thomas E.H. says
Hawkeye63
//Mt Pinitubo//
How many tonnes of CO2 was Pinatubo? How many tonnes do humans?
Kim Wentworth says
You simply back my comment.
Thomas E.H. says
@ Kim
Sarchasm: the immense gulf between the person conveying sarcasm and the person it was directed to.
Kim Wentworth says
Such a silly article. The climate changes over time, regardless of little insignificant creatures called human beings. So there is a partial govt shutdown. Nobody dying, no planes falling out of the sky, no trains off the track, taxes still coming out of my check. The term “nonessential workers” affected by this I hear all the time. Pelosi says security risk for POTUS to make state of the Union speech, B.S., in its purest form. Trump was elected for two reasons: he is not a politician, and a wall is getting built. End of story. Oh, by the way, a wall is the oldest, most effective way to distinguish, protect a border. Just ask the Vatican.
George says
Climate change deniers are incorrigible.
Hawkeye63 says
Congratulations Mr. Bishop. Your commentary sets a new standard for it’s glaring lack of logic and pitiful attempt to shift attention to your pet obsession, Global Warming, which has been re-named Climate Change because there has been no
” warming” for 20 years.
Nice try, but intelligent people find it pretty hard to believe your premise that
” walls don’t work” when every single entity and location that requires security uses walls and security fences, including all the elitist,
ultra wealthy, hypocritical, left wing globalists that you obviously support and hope will one day have absolute authority to rule the world.
No thanks. Good fences make good neighbors. A country that cannot control its borders risks destruction. And of course we need sound environmental policy, but climate will always change and no one can stop it.
ERL says
The general political leanings of everyone commenting is obvious, but Aaron’s point from this sentence is worth heeding regardless of the reader’s leaning: “If the President of the United States sets a precedent by declaring a national emergency to get funding for a wall, then what will stop a more liberal president in the future from declaring Climate Change as a national security threat?” And that point is, to me at least, that two can play the tough-guy game. Pelosi demonstrated that last week. But the larger concern I have is that 300 million Americans can also play that game and fight each other endlessly by taking cues from the worst actions of our leaders. Or we can recognize that we’ve been granted a balance of powers and due process and a system that seeks consensus building. I think you are correct that Trump was elected because “he is not a politician”. But he is extremely self-centered and narcissistic. His Trump brand will always trump both liberal and conservative points of view. People on both sides of the aisle try to decode his value system and are flummoxed. That’s because it’s neither liberal nor conservative and the merits of the wall or any other subject that enters his sphere of attention will always be secondary to his brand.