He sang a different tune ...
- Thread starter Diogenes
- Start date
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
It's time to debunk a few lies the Democrats and their shills like @Poor Richard Saunders cling to.
LIE: "Republicans control all 3 branches of government and don’t need Democrats to end the shutdown."
REALITY: The Senate has a 60 vote threshold and Republicans control just 53 seats. Nearly all Senate Democrats have voted AGAINST reopening the government 10 times.
LIE: "Republicans refuse to reopen the government and pay our troops."
REALITY: President Trump took unilateral action to pay our military men and women on October 15, while Democrats held the government hostage, and some Democrats complained about it.
LIE: "House Republicans aren’t showing up to work, and didn't do their job".
REALITY: House Republicans voted to fund the government weeks ago. The Schumer shutdown is happening in the Senate.
LIE: "Republicans control all 3 branches of government and don’t need Democrats to end the shutdown."
REALITY: The Senate has a 60 vote threshold and Republicans control just 53 seats. Nearly all Senate Democrats have voted AGAINST reopening the government 10 times.
LIE: "Republicans refuse to reopen the government and pay our troops."
REALITY: President Trump took unilateral action to pay our military men and women on October 15, while Democrats held the government hostage, and some Democrats complained about it.
LIE: "House Republicans aren’t showing up to work, and didn't do their job".
REALITY: House Republicans voted to fund the government weeks ago. The Schumer shutdown is happening in the Senate.
You seem confused as to my argument. I said the GOP could have prevented a shutdown by doing their job before Oct 1 and passing all the appropriation bills.
Question 1. Did the GOP majority in the House pass the appropriation bills prior to the Oct 1 deadline? Yes/No
Question 2. Has the GOP controlled House actually held a session where they voted on anything in the last five weeks? Yes/No.
The correct answer to both of those questions would certainly raise a question as to whether House Republicans did their job and whether they are showing up for work.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
No, they couldn't because House appropriations bills must subsequently be voted on by the Senate. Full bills require Senate input; House versions often differ sharply.
As you've already been informed, when full appropriations are not agreed upon by the October 1 deadline, Continuing Resolutions (CRs) are common, so that the government can remain open while debate and negotiations continue.
Per analyses from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. August 2025, the House had passed some appropriation, others (e.g., Legislative Branch, Energy and Water) were defeated or withdrawn after protracted amendment and debate. Leadership scrapped plans to complete all bills before August recess. As a result, House Speaker Mike Johnson prioritized a short-term CR over full appropriations to keep the government funded while work went forward. Again, as you've already been told, this is not uncommon.
.On September 19, 2025, the House duly passed H.R. 5371 (a "clean" CR extending funding at FY2025 levels through November 21) by 217-212, with near-unanimous GOP support over significant Democrat opposition.
H.R. 5371 then advanced to the Senate, and Minority Leader Schumer blocked it. As you've been informed multiple times, the Senate requires 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.
Senate Democrats have blocked the House CR 11+ times so far (e.g., 50-43 on Oct 20), demanding policy riders which are unacceptable to the majority party's caucus.
Would the full appropriations bills have made it through the Senate if the House had completed all 12 before October 1?
No.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
To forestall any further obfuscation, please note the following:
To get a precise count, you would need to:
www.govinfo.gov
en.wikipedia.org
- Democrats controlled the House for most of the period from 1976 to 1994. During this time, Democrats held a majority in the House for decades. During these years, Continuing Resolutions (CRs) were often used to fund the government, although the total number passed is not a publicly tracked statistic.
- Multiple CRs can be passed in a single year. It is common for Congress to pass multiple short-term CRs to extend funding while they negotiate a final budget deal.
To get a precise count, you would need to:
- Determine the specific years when Democrats held the House majority since 1976.
- Review the Congressional Record for those years, looking specifically for public laws labeled as "Continuing Appropriations Acts."
Govinfo
Continuing resolution - Wikipedia
Once again, you seem to not understand the process for laws. We will never know if the Senate would have voted for the bills the GOP House failed to pass because the GOP House failed to pass them.
It's interesting that you keep refusing to blame the people in charge that failed to do their job. Have you ever had a job where you were supposed to complete something by a deadline? Did your boss let you blame someone else when you didn't do your job?
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Once again, you fail to understand how bills become laws and how negotiations work.To forestall any further obfuscation, please note the following:
The official records for each CR and the specific composition of Congress at the time of passage are available in the archives of Congress.
- Democrats controlled the House for most of the period from 1976 to 1994. During this time, Democrats held a majority in the House for decades. During these years, Continuing Resolutions (CRs) were often used to fund the government, although the total number passed is not a publicly tracked statistic.
- Multiple CRs can be passed in a single year. It is common for Congress to pass multiple short-term CRs to extend funding while they negotiate a final budget deal.
To get a precise count, you would need to:
- Determine the specific years when Democrats held the House majority since 1976.
- Review the Congressional Record for those years, looking specifically for public laws labeled as "Continuing Appropriations Acts."
Govinfo
Continuing resolution - Wikipedia
For most continuing resolutions from that time period, they were for a short period of time to allow for the passage of the appropriation bills.
Are you as ignorant of history as you are of classic literature?
In the past the CRs kept spending to the levels of the previous year's budget. At this time the GOP did a midyear adjustment so the current CR is not last year's budget but is based on mid year cuts. To claim it is a CR like previous ones is to not understand the way previous CRs worked.
Are you clairvoyant? We means everyone since something didn't happen no one can know if it would have happened.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
H.R. 5371 is a clean HR.
The current (proposed but unpassed) CR is designed to continue last year's budget levels (post-FY 2025 CR), but the OBBBA's mid-year cuts from earlier in 2025 are already operational and would carry forward under any CR.
The term "clean CR" refers to a short-term funding bill that simply maintains the status quo from the prior fiscal year (FY 2025 levels) without introducing new policy changes, spending increases, cuts, or unrelated "riders" (add-ons). It's called "clean" because it avoids partisan battles over extraneous issues, focusing solely on keeping the government operational while full-year appropriations are negotiated. In contrast, Democrats have pushed alternative CRs .
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
No, H.R. 5371, the Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2026, has not passed the Senate as of October 22, 2025.
The bill passed the House on September 19, 2025, by a 217-212 vote, but it has faced repeated procedural failures in the Senate due to the 60-vote cloture threshold required to overcome filibusters.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
The Senate also failed to pass S2882 which would fund the government and keep it open - 50 GOP Senators voted against it.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Not a clean bill.
It was a "status quo" measure loaded with Democrat priorities, including the permanent extension of expanded Affordable Care Act (ACA) premium tax credits (originally from the American Rescue Plan) and additional Medicaid funding. These provisions were projected to increase federal deficits by covering millions more people under health insurance subsidies.
Let's see if I have this right. You are claiming that the GOP bill would keep the status quo from the current year but then provide evidence that it does NOT keep the status quo.
The current status quo is that people receive subsidies for health care. Under the GOP CR they will no longer receive subsidies.
Diogenes
Nemo me impune lacessit
Confused? I'm not.
The clean CR passed by the House would keep the government open until November 21.
The enhanced subsidies will expire automatically on December 31.
People still will. The ACA’s original PTCs, enacted in 2010, have no expiration date and remain in effect unless repealed or modified. ARPA and IRA only set end dates for the enhanced subsidies, not the entire PTC program.
The expanded TEMPORARY premium tax credits (PTCs)/subsidies have been scheduled to expire this year since 2021, under the provisions of a law passed by Democrats - the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021. The enhanced PTCs were set to expire at the end of 2022, meaning subsidies would revert to pre-ARPA levels (smaller subsidies, income cap reinstated) unless extended, which Democrats did when they passed
the laughably-named Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022. Signed into law by Sleepy Joe Biden on August 16, 2022, the IRA extended the ARPA’s enhanced PTCs, continuing the higher subsidy amounts and broader eligibility. Expiration of Enhancements: The enhanced PTCs were extended through the end of 2025, after which they would revert to pre-ARPA levels. This piece of porcine slop was passed via reconciliation with Democrat votes only (51–50 in the Senate with Shamala Harris’s tiebreaker; 220–207 in the House).
The status quo is maintained.
H.R. 5371 does not strip premium tax credits (PTCs) for any Affordable Care Act (ACA) enrollees, nor does it alter ACA eligibility requirements in any way.