take the deal, but I wonder if they will.

Republicans control the House, the Senate and of course the White House. I know there is a 60-vote requirement to pass legislation, but they could change that anytime they want and force the CR through. Of corse, in two weeks we'd be right back here.

Th reason that the Republicans are antsy about completely throwing it under the bus is because the Republicans want some Democrats to take the fall for people's health insurance rising. Plus they know that shredding the 60 completely will be a grant to the Democrats to do a number of things when the next Democratic President comes into office combined with a Democratic controlled House and Senate.

The Democrats need to not cave though and force the Republicans to find a way out of this mess on their own because the Republicans caused it themselves.

to make their own rules. Specifically, ART I, Section Five states:

"Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."

This is the relevant portion of Senate Rule XXII:

‘‘Is it the sense of the Senate that the debate shall be brought to a close?’’ And if that question shall be decided in the affirmative by three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn—except on a measure or motion to amend the Senate rules, in which case the necessary affirmative vote shall be two-thirds of the Senators present and voting—then said measure, motion, or other matter pending before the Senate, or the unfinished business, shall be the unfinished business to the exclusion of all other business until disposed of."

When 100 Senators have been chosen and sworn, the number to invoke cloture is 60 [3/5] and that's without regard to whether they are present and voting.

Changing the rules, however, takes 2/3 of the Senators present and voting. That number is 67 when every Senator is present and votes.

the end result was Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.

The Senate is the only organization within government that requires the majority to negotiate with a minority that has at least 41%.

Senators COULD eliminate it; however, the resulting back and forth with successive Congresses undoing their predecessors actions likely would be very disruptive overall.

Republicans won't go for that at all.

They sure as hell don't want that.

He's offering what the GOPs floated?!

He's got his for life, I guess.

The GOP have offered NOTHING but "concepts of a plan", but "Repeal and Replace" is their main goal, or better "Rpeal" period, something that they have harped on for the past 15 years.

The ACA is passed out on the floor, and Chuck looks at the cameras.

I mean, if all he is asking for is a 1-year extension, after which they can kill it again, why wouldn't the GOP take that deal in a heartbeat?

Let's hope there was some much tougher fine print in Schumer's offer.

At this stage, I'd rather see the GOP try to make it through the Thanksgiving and Christmas travel seasons explaining why everything remains broken.

And remember that inflation is rising as is unemployment, so the pot is going to be boiling the Republicans real soon.

He should, after Democrats wanted to light him up in spring, but the fact that he low-balled an offer with just a one-year extension on the ACA subsidies (when billionaires get "permanent" tax breaks) doesn't put me at ease. Because, as you said, the GOP should've jumped at such an offer on its face.

After Tuesday's election, my initial offer would've been to fund the extensions with no sunset provision, release the SNAP funds ASAP, and restore LIHEAP resources also ASAP so disadvantaged Americans don't freeze in their homes this winter. And if the Republicans balked, shout from the rooftops that Trump and MAGA want people to die from the cold, die from starvation, and die from not being able to see their doctor.

if the reports of Schumer's deal are accurate?

I certainly believe that Schumer is capable of making such a weak offer, but if so, the Republicans should have accepted that with about 5 milliseconds of thought. Why didn't they?

I think these reports cannot possibly be accurate.

Trump has been all over the map on this. He dared the Dems to hold the line, saying he would use the shutdown to do even more devastation to the government and to punish blue states. But then a few days ago he was demanding that Senate Repulicans kill the filibuster to end the shutdown.

Let's assume that Trump really isn't calling the shots. There are many behind the scenes who are probably enjoying seeing government flailing. This surely includes people like Theil, Bannon, Miller and most of the cabinet Secretaries.

So it is entirely possible they they fully intended for this conflict to either result in total capitulation by the Dems very quickly, or a long (like many months) shutdown that essentially kills all the programs the billionaires hate. And they may not be telling Thune,

There will always be a fight with them no matter what, GQP do not believe in healthcare at all regarding the less fortunate.

When a handful of Democratic Senators passed the CR back in March, Krasnov got everything he wanted, he got his Big Ugly Death Bill passed that gutted our social safety net.

Fast forward to today's CR, the only bargaining chip that Democrats have is Obamacare subsidies, and Chuck wants a temporary deal to fund it.

I guess the gutting of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, SNAP, etc. etc. is a done deal, the Big Ugly Death has become the law of the land, much harder to rescind once it is a law.

I year of subsidies for Obamacare, Magats should throw a party, will insurers change their premiums once this is agreed to?

When does the House have a changing of the guard? Because, there is going to be a Democratic sweep during the mid-terms 11/26. It's not really the Senate that we need to worry about as much as the House. We need a House with a Democratic supermajority to make sure that the Republicans in the future don't screw us over.

Control ACA has turned into bargaining chip. With a super majority Dems, the Republicans lose their leverage.

it ought to be kicked to February 2027 when there is a good chance we will control the House and the budgeting process.

The absolute worst deal would be to kick it 12 months, meaning that the Republicans could screw us over in the lame duck period after the 2026 elections.

Surely Schumer is smart enough to figure this out. He is, isn't he?

Just let us hope he is smart enough to figure out the math.

I don't see it that way.

Every single Congressional Republican campaigning for a seat next year will have to stand up before the press and elucidate to a highly-pissed off electorate why they WON'T be extending the ACA subsidies.

They don't have the balls. They know that would screw their chances on Nov. 3 2026, especially after the ass kicking they received this week.

They WANT a deal that makes this go away until after the election.

Killing the subsidy before the election won't really be noticed. The public at large will not pay attention to that until the open enrollment period, that's only a few days before the election. I don't think we can win the mid-terms with that being the primary issue. But I think we can win if we have a proactive platform of plans that attack the fascism and lawlessness of Trump..

So I don't think it is helpful to kick it only to September 2026. That won't help us win, and once the Republicans kill it, it will be very hard to bring it back, especially if we don't control the Senate.

And allowing the GOP to kill it in the lame duck period is also a loser.

The only period that makes sense to me is after the new House is seated in 2027.

====

It is important to understand that this affects 22 million Americans. That is a significant number, but that also means that it just doesn't affect 80% of the voters. A more powerful electoral issue would be to add dental and visual benefits to real Medicare. That is how the Advantage scam works. With Advantage, they save a lot of money on hospitalization simply by denying treatments, and they give some of that back in the form of glasses, hearing aids and dental work. That affects 70 million people directly and another 30 million are close enough to the Medicare age to care about this.

If that is what Schumer is proposing, he should lose his leadership position.

The politics of the senate. Throwing a fit is easy, getting a deal done is not. I’m here until I’m not. lol.

A temporary extension helps the GOP in the short term by postponing the pain of skyrocketing premiums until AFTER the midterms.

It says...

(probably the HHS one) since the point of the C.R. was to give more time to FINALIZE and PASS the actual appropriations bills - whether as singles, "Minibus" combos, or a huge "Omnibus" bill.

government, but the Repubs want to keep it shut. Trump is also helping to drive this narrative by doing everything he can to NOT provide snap benefits.

It placates the Democratic 'moderates' who presumably want to open the government regardless of cost while placing a marker--we tried to negotiate, made an offer and it was summarily rejected.

The Republicans and Trump own this shutdown. make them own it entirely. The Democratic Party needs to stop bailing out Republicans from their worst inclinations.

Are people going to get hurt? Yes. That's the whole point. the pain, the cruelty, anything to get their way and to complete the total destruction of our democratic Republic.

It's a matter of hurting now or being destroyed later.

It sucks. All of it sucks. But I firmly believe we need to hold the line to the bitter end because we are on the right side of history and we owe our ancestors, the sacrifices they made for our sake, everything.

Not on our watch!

As long as the government is shut down, the Epstein files are closed. If the GOP gets another member from Tennessee sworn in after Dec. 2nd to neutralize Grijalva's vote The Epstein files remain closed. MAGA GOP doesn't want the Government re-opened anytime soon.

It's up to the Dems now to message that!! They offered a clean bill.

I wish I could feel confident that the Democratic candidate might win District 7 in TN (my district). Though that district includes 1/3 of Nashville and all of Clarksville (a lot of blue support), it also contains a LOT of MAGA territory.

I thought it was a done deal. Let's go Nashville and Clarksville!!!

I was amazed at the attendance and the support of drivers!
Clarksville has Fort Campbell AND Austin Peay State University. So, a lot of young people. It is currently the 5th largest city in Tennessee!

There is no "neutralize" if another (R) comes in unless some other (R) or (D) changes their vote.

They need 218 for the discharge petition, they have 217 now and Grijalva would be #218. A simple majority in the House in general is that 218 number (50% of 435 +1), enough to force the vote and enough to pass (assuming the final vote holds).

But ya, they're working hard to get one of the Yes's to switch.

A discharge position always needs 218 signatures which is a majority of the 435 seats in the House. It doesn't matter how many seats might be open at the time. It always requires 218. Grijalva is #218. The Texas district which will have a runoff next month (It will be 2 Dems in the runoff for Sylvester Turner's old seat) will be #219 if Grijalva still doesn't get sworn in by before that runoff election. Currently there are 213 Democrats sworn in. All have signed the discharge petition. 4 Republicans have also signed to make 217. Grijalva will be #218 unless somebody who already signed changes their mind. The Special Election in Tennessee is meaningless as far as the discharge petition is concerned.

nt

healthcare for you no!

For everything he is and everything he isn't. One thing's for sure, he is useless in the progression of humanity. Let it fly!

The tax cut for billionaires has no one year end date. What is good for the uber rich should be good enough for the rest of us. Why would we want to fight this battle again in one year?

Hold the line Democrats.

Many non-MAGA Republicans in the media have been critical of the Democrats saying they should agree to something effectively the same as Schumer's "offer". They have been naive enough to believe the Republicans would actually go along with it. By making the "offer", and having Republicans reject it, Schumer proves that the Republicans do not care about Health Insurance premiums doubling (or more) for millions of Americans - in fact, they want that to happen. In the end, it further strengthens the Democrats' position.

nt

If the Senate passes that CR the Republicans can pat themselves on the back and they don't have to do anything else. They got what they wanted.

Not to mention that even if it passes Congress that the orange turd monster can just veto it and then we are screwed.

No deal unless they pass the ACA subsidies and it's signed into law before they vote on the CR

Link to tweet

When Dems were voting down the House CR, Americans could think Dems were responsible for holding up the works and not "working together" with Rs. But now that Dems have made a proposal that asks very little in return for their votes, Rs have shown their hand by voting it down.

Now it's much clearer and easier to see the Rs are the ones who won't negotiate and don't want to re-open the government.

next year, then they will continue ACA subsidies. Repugs feel it is their lot in life to punish people.

to become impossible, so that you will DIE--- and thus NOT VOTE!

It is as simple as that!



(as an old Democrat, I support that offer, to end the shutdown---
but not enough for the GQP as it seems, who refuse to even talk---
too busy beating off to pedophile videos!)

There goes that new word again 'affordability’. I mean it's so new, what does it even mean? Is it even in the dictionary? /s