Davis: Dems playing politics over shutdown

An area Republican Congressman said it's disappointing that Democrats are more interested in playing politics than keeping the federal government open.

Representative Rodney Davis of Taylorville said he never thought a shutdown would occur, and that the House passed four different pieces of legislation in an attempt to keep that from happening.



Davis added that the Senators wanted to keep an insurance perk for themselves instead of avoiding a shutdown.



Davis said that the only opporunity Republicans had to make common sense changes to the health care law was before people could begin signing up for insurance on Tuesday.  He said President Obama and Senate Democrats showed their unwillingness to address concerns that the American people had with the health care legislation.

Davis said House Republicans are willing to come to the table to negotiate with the Senate, but so far that hasn't happened.

Meanwhile, Illinois Democratic Senator Dick Durbin said allowing a government shutdown to happen is no way to run a country or manage the economic recovery.

He said the House needs to set aside the political brinksmanship, stop manufacturing one crisis after another and pass a short term funding bill so the government can get back to work.

Sections (2):News, Local

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

spangwurfelt wrote on October 01, 2013 at 4:10 pm

Pretty funny stuff. Remember the state of play -

The Senate passed a clean continuing resolution.

Obama's said he'd sign a clean continuing resolution.

The House could easily pass a clean continuing resolution if it came to the floor.

But that means Boehner would have to accept a bipartisan vote. Which he refuses to do.

Why? Because the Boehner is being held hostage by the tea party caucus -- which comes to about one third of his caucus.

Here's the way out.

Give up the blackmail dream, because it's failed. Hold a vote on a clean continuing resolution. Problem solved in less than an hour.

It's up to people like Davis and Schock to tell Hastert to take off the beltbomb before he does serious damage.

Instead, like a proper little minion, he's trying to spread Boehner's media point about "they won't negotiate with us." What Davis won't tell you is that House Republicans refused 18 times Senate requests for a budget conference over the last six months. It was literally only with one hour to go before the shutdown, 11PM, that all of a sudden they wanted one. Why? Because they don't really want one. They wanted the photo-op, not the result, so they could try to foist the blame for their dysfunction onto anyone but themselves.

Mr Dreamy wrote on October 01, 2013 at 5:10 pm

Davis won't get my vote, and I've always been a "registered" Republican. By that I mean I've voted in every election since I could, beginning at 21 yoa, and always in Republican primaries, never Democrat primaries. I've contributed to Republicans and never to Democrats, I've worked on campaigns. I have voted for a few Democrats, but I'm one of those votes that Davis is counting on.

The ACA law is the law. It went into operation today despite the shutdown. That horse has left the barn. If that was the hang-up, it's over, so a clean CR should be easy to do, if Boehner calls the bill, but some opstreperous GOP (as described in a News Gazette editorial) won't allow it. The Speaker has not shown leadership, he has shown spinelessness.

And Davis, a freshman legislator, in lockstep with the new right, also has no spine to do the right thing, insist on the Speaker calling a clean CR, lift the shutdown and then, using Obama's own words, fix the "glitches", or in other words, work on the ACA a piece at a time. 

Erika Harold is non-starter, she is running to the right of Davis and I suspect she would become the next darling of the new right.

There is still plenty of time to run. Isn't there anybody who can run, win, and stand up to a minority faction?

 

 

 

Lostinspace wrote on October 01, 2013 at 5:10 pm

Head-examination alert for anyone who votes for a Republican candidate who does not explicitly and repeatedly disavow the t-party.

increvable wrote on October 01, 2013 at 10:10 pm

Here's the letter I just sent to Rep. Davis. Who knows? He might break ranks. It's a swing district.

--

Mr. Davis, Your description in the News-Gazette of 1 Oct of what has happened in the past few days is not correct. The House is the one "playing politics" by connecting appropriations to repeal or delay of the Affordable Care Act. These are two unrelated items and you are attempting to use the former to get your way on the latter. If these reforms to the health care system are going to be such a disaster, then you should allow the Democrats to run into that brick wall. If you are right, then you will win in 2014 and 2016, but for now, you have lost this argument. Please vote at every opportunity for a clean continuing resolution to fund the federal government. Please vote at every opportunity to raise the debt ceiling. Turn your attention to the genuine problems facing our state and our country. We have quite enough already without creating more.

bluegrass wrote on October 01, 2013 at 10:10 pm

What a bunch.  Whining on and on.  So what if Obamacare is the law?  Should a peice of garbage squeaked through by a congress in power for 2 years stay on the books until the end of time because "it's the law."  At one time it was the law that runaway slaves caught in the north should be returned to their "owners."  Is it the same as the ACA?  Obviously not, but the point is that just because something is law doesn't make it right, or subject to change over time.

Davis is absolutetly right to stand up against this law.  It is a hot mess.  If the democrats had any sense at all they'd let themselves off the hook right now, but they're too stuck in their own ideology to see reality. 

Sincerely,

The Minority Faction

P.S.  The government was "shut down" all day today.  How many people died?  How many old people lost their life savings?  How many children went hungry?  How many puppies were murdered?  How many planes were delayed?  How many peoples lives were changed, other than a few who will get a few days off with pay and interest? 

MEJ wrote on October 02, 2013 at 2:10 am

Well I am not sure what needs changed in the law. It hasn't really been in place for more than a day now. Its seems a little early to tell how effective it is, or if any real problems need to be addressed.  Maybe you have done some studies today? Sounds like more BS to me.

Slaves? Really? The only slaves are the American people paying for the profit margins for all the vested interests between them and their healthcare when they get sick. The same vested interests who are doing anything right now to make sure nothing changes for their cash cow.

Davis is towing the line. He could care less about your healthcare. You know what he cares about? Where his lobby money is coming from, and its not the uninsured people in the US. The same people who might catch a break by this law. Come on the guy worked for inmate/former governor George Ryan for pete's sake. You can't make this stuff up.

As for you last "dramatic" points: I don't know of any deaths from the government shut down; Let's hope not anyway. Now, most of the old people have already been "screwed" out of their life savings by the wall street collapse thanks to Republican lobbying for deregulation. So your are right that didn't happen today. Air traffic controllers are mandated so that did not happen either. They had to work, but I can bet you it didn't make things easier for them today.

What you meet to say is your life was not changed.

Thousands of Americans lives were disrupted today. One example were the head starts programs that closed today. Many of thoese parents, I am sure, had to miss work to stay home with their kids. Most of whom were people who desperately need to work. Oh and there is the thousands of government workers who will not be getting paid and contributing to our economy.  They can't use sick time and vacation time if they are not scheduled to work. The are not getting paid. Nice attempt to villify them though.

So what is it costing Americans?

It looks to be about12.5 million per hour; And what do we get for that "nothing." It's already passed.

Sincerely,

The Ghost of Will Rogers

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/money-nothing-government-shutdown-costs-...

 

 

 

 

 

johnny wrote on October 04, 2013 at 4:10 am

I always love it when someone whose family recently battled cancer is described casually as not caring about health care.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 02, 2013 at 2:10 am
Profile Picture

The ACA vs. a law meant to protect slaveowners.  Clearly a reasonable comparison.

Please explain how this shutdown is anything more than posturing, and how it has any chance of getting Obamacare off the books.

bluegrass wrote on October 02, 2013 at 9:10 am

Now alabaster, to be fair, I clearly stated my point about the Fugutive Slave Laws.  The idea is not to compare the two laws on their substance.  The point is that there are horrible laws voted on and passed by congress and signed by the president.  Just because a law is on the books, doesn't mean it is not subject to change or repeal.  In other words, just because Harry Reid and Obama stand in front of a podium and declare, "It's the law," doesn't make it so forever.

I don't know what the chances are of getting this bill killed or changed or delayed.  Posturing is politics.  I do know that I got my update from my health insurance carrier yesterday, and my new ACA certified plan rates are going to increase by about 232%.  How should I feel about that?  Should I just grin and bear it?  Should I call Representative Davis and ask him to please just stop fighting against this law, so I can get on with the business of paying $7000 for, that last year cost me $2700?  Should I call Dick Durbin and thank him for exempting themselves and a few of their big business buddies from this law, and for putting off the employer mandate on ice for a year while I pay out the nose?  

I also know that a month ago the media and the politicians, save for a few like Cruz and Lee, were saying that Obamacare is a done deal, and we should all just take it.  Now, there is a real conversation going on in this country about the nuts and bolts of the language, and the pricing, and the implementation.  

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 02, 2013 at 9:10 am
Profile Picture

Fair enough.  I have serious concerns about ObamaCare as well, and I likely would have voted against it if I were (un)lucky enough to be a Congressman.  The bare facts are, however, that the Republicans have little or no chance to change anything about the law until they take control of the Senate and/or Presidency.

I just don't see this shutdown changing anything, so like I do with 95% of political controversies, I'll keep laughing about how worked up everyone is about this since it's unlikely to change anything in the long run.

Joris wrote on October 02, 2013 at 7:10 am

Standing up against the law--is fine.  I object to parts of it.  But linking it to the "general welfare" of the budget is crossing a line into a destructive partisanship. It is the linkage that is wrong--not, in this case, the Affordable Care Act.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 02, 2013 at 2:10 am
Profile Picture

Where's Political Observer?  I thought he/she was obligated to post a small novel about all the appalling "controversies" swirling around Rodney Davis after every article that contains his name.  Hey, did you hear that he held a campaign event in a U of I building?  And that he worked for George Ryan?  Got to let everyone know in case they didn't hear it the first 100 times.  It's practically Watergate 2.0!

Political Observer wrote on October 03, 2013 at 2:10 pm

"Alabaster Jones," writes:


Q.   "Where's Political Observer?  I thought he/she was obligated to post a small novel about all the appalling "controversies" swirling around Rodney Davis after every article that contains his name.'
-----------------------------


A.  Sorry to arrive so late to the discussion, Mr. Jones!  To paraphrase (and mangle) George H. W. Bush a bit, "When a guy is in deep, deep do-do, up to his neck (and higher), there's probably no need to pile on harder, just to drive him in deeper!"


In case you haven't noticed, Mr.Jones, just about everybody in this discussion thread, including the Republicans, are voicing disapproval for the decision of "DITTO!" Davis (R-Limbaugh) to duplicate (to the last ditto-mark!) Rush Limbaugh's argument that the Republicans need to keep the Government Shutdown going until that hated "Obamacare" (/"Romneycare!") is delayed for a year.  So why should I pile on?  It's much more fun to sit back, pop the popcorn and watch Dittohead Dead-Enders try to pull L'il Rodney out of the deep, deep do-do, while trying not to soil themselves too much in the process!


Q.  "Hey, did you hear that he ["DITTO!" Davis] held a campaign event in a U of I building?"


A.  Why, yes I did! (Did you hear about that, too?) 

I take it that you're referring to the discussion the other day about how "DITTO!" Davis had participated in a partisan political campaign rally, complete with campaign signs, campaign t-shirts and partisan endorsement speeches by 3 different  elected Champaign County Republican officials, right in a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY, even though Illinois state law clearly PROHIBITS partisan political activity (specifically including a rally) on State of Illinois property?! 

Yeah, I did hear all about that, Mr. Jones;  in fact, perhaps I should include a link to that discussion thread, in case newcomers to the discussion forum (especially law enforcement officials) might like to take a look the issue! (Bonus tip:  It's also really funny to see how far the"dead-enders" and trolls who passionately love  "DITTO!" Davis (R-Limbaugh)  will go to try to defend their beloved hero.) 

You can check it all out at this URL:


 http://www.news-gazette.com/news/local/2013-09-23/davis-formally-announces-re-election-bid.html


And, of course, let us also be sure to thank Mr. Alabaster Jones, of the "Family Guy" show on FOX, for the shout-out, to remind me that newcomers to the forum might enjoy taking a look at this discussion of yet more illegal behavior on the part of "DITTO!" Davis!             .


I might also add that an additional  bonus in the discussion at this link is that you can watch the dirty tricksters John Bambenek and Eric Bussell completely ruin the possibility that they could ever be elected to a significant position in Champaign County government, right before your very eyes...and that, of course, is a major victory for anybody interested in good government practices here in Champaign County.


(Say, speaking of Eric Bussell, has anybody seen him in the last week?  He seems to have immediately disappeared as soon as I posted the Illlinois law that prohibits partisan political rallies on State of Illinois property.  I hope he hasn't run into difficulties trying to raise the $1,000 for the check he said he'd write to Ann Callis if the appropriate state law was posted!)


Q.   And that he ["DITTO!" Davis] worked for George Ryan?


A.    Yes, absolutely!  "DITTO!" Davis (R-Limbaugh) worked for 4 years in George Ryan's Secretary of State's Office, so he was at Ground Zero of the "Licenses for Bribes" Scandal (and other scandals, as well) that sent George Ryan to prison!

In fact, "DITTO!" Davis' boss was Deb Detmers, who was George Ryan's campaign finance director (!!), and she was given immunity from prosecution in return for her testimony about all the corrupt things that she and other Ryan operatives were doing, at the time that "DITTO!" Davis worked there!


If anyone would like to read how dishonest the Davis campaign was when they tried to portray L'il Rodney as being "out of the loop" while working for George Ryan in the Secretary of State's Office, you can read all about it here:


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/04/1155640/-Rodney-Davis-not-entir...


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/02/1127119/-Rodney-Davis-IL-13-for...


Thanks once again for the shout-outs, Mr. Jones!  I hope you have a happy day!

 

Joris wrote on October 02, 2013 at 7:10 am

It is hard to conceive how--attaching a threat about the budget to a law long-since passed (however flawed!)--this makes any sense to the rest of us. Conservative Republicans chose--a deliberate choice--to link the Affordable Care Act to the budget and cause the shutdown of the government.  However much Congressman Davis blames the Democrats and the President, the linkage is created by and insisted on by the Extremist section of the Republican party. Without that creation and insistance--no shutdown. How this choice can be blamed on the Democrats? It is like a child throwing stones and blaming someone who gets hit because they didn't duck.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 02, 2013 at 8:10 am
Profile Picture

Davis doesn't strike me as a Tea Party type who would be happy about this situation, but he's not about to say anything negative about members of his own party.  He's got a tough primary next year and he's going to be as careful as he can be.

STM wrote on October 02, 2013 at 9:10 am

Yeah Blue, the ACA was crafted primarily by moneyed interests and their lobbyists. I don't disagree that it's a "hot mess" as  you put it.  It's the "so what if it's law?" part I have a problem with.  It was passed by both houses and signed into law.  The Supreme Court has ruled upon it (in part). If you choose to look at last year's presidential election as an indication, the anti-ACA candidate was defeated—although I look at it as a reach to look at that as a true measure of national preference.

That said, I think it's a bad precedent to use existing law as a wrench to be thrown into the workings of government as the Tea Party faction of the Republicans is now doing. What is to keep minority factions from using every pet issue as blackmail from here on out?  You think government is ineffective now, wait until this happens every year, only on different issues.

Yes the law needs fixed.  But this is no way to go about it.

alabaster jones 71 wrote on October 02, 2013 at 9:10 am
Profile Picture

As long as districts keep being gerrymandered as ridiculously as they are now, it's only going to get worse.  There are only a couple dozen truly competitive congressional districts that don't lean heavily towards one party left, out of 435.  That should be incredibly disturbing to anyone who believes in the concept of representative democracy.

bluegrass wrote on October 02, 2013 at 1:10 pm

Okay, first of all, can we just stop with the whole blame the Tea Party rhetoric?  There is not really a Tea Party.  There are no regular meetings to attend or cards to carry.  There are, however various individuals who are Constitutional Conservatives, people who think of themselves as Libertarian, and fiscal conservatives who see the direction the country is going and would like to reign in the budget, and break this cycle of government growth and intrusion.

So you don't like the law, you agree it's a "hot mess," but you think we should move forward with it anyway, because Obama was re-elected?  I also remember the 2010 election cycle when, mainly in response to pushing through the ACA, Republicans picked up 65 seats in the House and took the gavel from Pelosi, 6 Senate seats to break the filibuster-proof majority, and 680 seats in the various state legislatures nationwide.  An unequivocal landslide victory.    Should we just ignore that because Obama was re-elected, and because John Roberts decided it was not his job to interpret the law in one case?  

You don't like this way of going about changing the law.  Okay, fine.  What is a better course of action?

spangwurfelt wrote on October 02, 2013 at 2:10 pm

"Okay, first of all, can we just stop with the whole blame the Tea Party rhetoric?"

Nope. The polls show that only major demographic group who thought the shutdown was a by and large a good idea was those who self-identified as tea party supporters. Not those who self-identified as conservatives, because they were mostly against it (55%-37%). Not those who self-identified as Republicans, because they were mostly against it (53%-40%).

Those who self-identified as the tea party supporters forced this shutdown, and they did it because they wanted it (56% for, 34% against). They own it lock, stock, and barrel, and it's a sign of just how screwed they are realizing they are that Bluegrass wants to cast the blame elsewhere.

Sorry, Bluegrass. This one's yours, and you can't dodge it.

"What is a better course of action?"

Follow the Constitution. Really. Even tea partiers can do that, if they try hard enough.

Bulldogmojo wrote on October 02, 2013 at 3:10 pm

Bluegrass says what?

"There is not really a Tea Party.  There are no regular meetings to attend or cards to carry"

Then what were you imagining when you stated this about IRS tax exemption approval abuses?

{"Ok, so let me get this straight.  First, IRS workers intentionally discriminate against a group of people based only on ther political positions.  Second, I don't approve of their actions, nor do I like it that people like you defend their actions."}

If the Tea party doesn't exist then they (PACs) don't need any tax exemptions do they?

Which is it they exist or they don't

bluegrass wrote on October 03, 2013 at 10:10 pm

Touche' Bulldogmojo.

My point is that "Tea Party" has become the pariah for any opposition to libs and French Republicans.  Your point is well taken.  

STM wrote on October 03, 2013 at 7:10 am

Blue, I agreed that the ACA is a hot mess because I'd like Medicare for all.  Period.  As to how to change the law?  If you're such a strict constitutionalist, write or petition your congressman (or woman) asking to draft changes to the law. Hopefully (for you) they will. He/she can then possibly pick up co-sponsors, work them through committee, then present them to be voted upon.  I don't think holding the government at gunpoint (figuratively of course) to get your way is the solution.  What does the constitution say about extortion?

I don't really think you read my response because I basically said that if you let a minority of legislators use this tactic once, they'll do it every time.  I also don't think you read it because I said I don't necessarily think the election was a mandate. I also don't think the 2010 congressional election was either but I guess you're picking and choosing which elections to believe — your choice.

Similarly, I agree with Bulldog that you're trying to have the whole Tea-Party existence thing whichever way suits your argument at a given time, which is a common tactic of those losing an argument.

I also agree with Spang that this shutdown mess is wholly upon the Tea Party and it's sympathizers (if they really, truly exist) — they own it baby.

See?  I agree with all of you guys on stuff! Why can't we all just get along?

Mr Dreamy wrote on October 02, 2013 at 6:10 pm

Davis will vote for a clean CR, but Speaker Boehner won't bring it up for a vote.

i know the following is attenuated, but it does provide hope.

Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.): A Davis constituent tells The Huffington Post that a Davis aide told him Wednesday, "Congressman Davis is prepared to vote 'yes' on a clean CR." Asked for comment, Davis spokesman Andrew Flach told HuffPost that Davis isn't "going to speculate" on what bills may come up in the House and "will continue to vote for proposals brought to the floor that will fund the federal government." [10/2/2013]