Senate Dems Cave on Government Shutdown

 

In a speech on the Senate floor, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer announced a deal on reopening the federal government. Sen. Mitch McConnell immediately introduced a cloture vote on the effort.

The measure would fund the government through Feb. 8. In return for Democratic support, McConnell has promised Schumer to “open a debate on immigration.”

Update:

.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 60 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    The King Prawn (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    The Dems miscalculated in deciding to hold the health of American children hostage in exchange for getting special treatment for illegal immigrants.

    There is a massive distinction between the 10 million illegal aliens who came here as adults, and the 700,000 young adults who were brought here as children. You undercut your argument by not noting that the limited issue is DACA and not people who came here as adults.

    DACA is only the buzzword. It’s the camel’s nose under the tent. We could give them DACA cleanly and they would reject it.

    Let’s test your hypothesis!

    I’m good with that. Conversely, we could use it as our leverage to get other needed immigration changes now that it’s been proven ineffective for the dems. We’ve basically stolen this arrow from their quiver.

    • #31
  2. Roberto the Weary Inactive
    Roberto the Weary
    @Roberto

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    But, this means we will be doing all of this again in three weeks? doesn’t it? We are celebrating the can being kicked down the road and not even that far down.

    So what happens in February?

    It’s a total Dem cave. The CR and the DACA vote in February are now two separate things so the Dems lost any leverage they thought they have.

    Even the Post is calling this a cave on their part.

    • #32
  3. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    It could be a thing of beauty to watch if congressional republicans own the DACA fix (popular, emotional issue) and use it to get important things done like limiting chain immigration to spouses/dependent children and improved border security. I wonder if Harry Reid is punching himself in the face for retiring now.

    • #33
  4. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    The King Prawn (View Comment):
    It could be a thing of beauty to watch if congressional republicans own the DACA fix (popular, emotional issue) and use it to get important things done like limiting chain immigration to spouses/dependent children and improved border security. I wonder if Harry Reid is punching himself in the face for retiring now.

    I might get tired of all the winning.

    • #34
  5. DocJay Inactive
    DocJay
    @DocJay

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    The King Prawn (View Comment):
    It could be a thing of beauty to watch if congressional republicans own the DACA fix (popular, emotional issue) and use it to get important things done like limiting chain immigration to spouses/dependent children and improved border security. I wonder if Harry Reid is punching himself in the face for retiring now.

    I might get tired of all the winning.

    Harry Reid has dementia.  He may well be doing some punching unless the helmet prevents it.

    • #35
  6. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Over the weekend, the conservative Washington Examiner noted that a 43 year old Medical Doctor was detained by ICE. He had a Green Card. He was brought to the U.S when he was 3 years old. For more information google “Michigan Doctor ICE.”

    The Democrats were right to demand an open amendment process in DACA. I am glad that McConnell agreed to it.

    Not following. Because a 43 year old MD resident alien was inconvenienced by ICE, the entire Federal Government’s funding process should be held hostage to making sure that doesn’t happen again?

    If we are going to shutdown the Federal Government until our pet issues are resolved, I can think of things a lot higher on the priority list than making sure resident aliens suffer no inconvenience.

    You bit. This is how a hijack begins.

    This is not a hijack. The issue before us is DACA. A 43 year old medical doctor who was brought here from Poland when he was 3 years old pretty well fits the bill of why Dems refused to agree to cloture on Friday, and agreed to it today once an open amendment process was promised.

    Skillfully done.  If one contests your attempt to use a single medical professional as a proxy for hundreds of thousands, the hijack continues.  As it just did.

     

    • #36
  7. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    J Climacus (View Comment):

    The King Prawn (View Comment):
    It could be a thing of beauty to watch if congressional republicans own the DACA fix (popular, emotional issue) and use it to get important things done like limiting chain immigration to spouses/dependent children and improved border security. I wonder if Harry Reid is punching himself in the face for retiring now.

    I might get tired of all the winning.

    I don’t care so much about the winning as I care about getting [expletive] right. Our immigration system has been a CF for decades. Dems have always used emotional arguments to stymie any chance we had to implement even moderate or minimalist repairs. We own the emotional issue now. Anything the dems don’t agree to is because they don’t want the dreamers to have the status everyone agrees they should have. We can finally argue from a position of strength that all our other ideas are because we don’t want to have to redo this all again in fifteen years. It’s probably overly optimistic on my part to hope that we play these cards well and wisely, but until McConnell demonstrates otherwise I will assume he has the skillset required to do this. This has nothing to do with Trump. This is about congressional republicans not stepping on their own [expletives] for once.

    • #37
  8. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Why did CNN and company focus blame on Democrats this time? Those reporters never cared about truth before.

    If Republicans don’t understand this time why progressive media defended them, Republicans won’t be prepared for the next PR contest.

    • #38
  9. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Dems and NT’s, please keep underestimating him. 

    • #39
  10. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    Why did CNN and company focus blame on Democrats this time? Those reporters never cared about truth before.

    If Republicans don’t understand this time why progressive media defended them, Republicans won’t be prepared for the next PR contest.

    Just read and listen to everything Scott Adams says about Trump and persuasion. I can’t explain it better than Adams does. I’m not even going to try.

    • #40
  11. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Dems and NT’s, please keep underestimating him

    Him who? Pretty sure Trump’s big part in this will be signing his name and taking credit after all the heavy lifting is over.

    • #41
  12. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    I’m not even going to try.

    Small mercies appreciated, bigly.

    • #42
  13. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    The King Prawn (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Dems and NT’s, please keep underestimating him

    Him who? Pretty sure Trump’s big part in this will be signing his name and taking credit after all the heavy lifting is over.

    Well, I think a major part the President played in this was providing a spine transplant to Senate GOP’ers.

    First, there was the bipartisan televised confab on immigration issues with the President acting reasonable and open to ideas. Then there was his rejecting Schumer’s reported offering of “authorization” of funds for the wall, which the WH immediately shot down as illusory because “authorization” is not actually “appropriation” of funds. Last, there is Trump telling Schumer “no” when he made his last reported trip to the WH with a list of additional things he was asking for to get the Dems to quit their obstruction to funding the government.

    If Congress could respond to Trump’s lead  like this more often, good things will happen. But then the GOP isn’t known as the stupid party for nothing, so I will not count on anything till it occurs..

    • #43
  14. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Fritz (View Comment):
    But then the GOP isn’t known as the stupid party for nothing, so I will not count on anything till it occurs.

    Always a safe bet. I saw more from congress on this than Trump. He did his part, which was mostly to not shipwreck the work McConnell was doing. I’m no fan of most of what our congress critters do, but credit where it’s due, and all that.

    • #44
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I was mistaken.  The media strongly are saying that the Dems caved.

    • #45
  16. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    The King Prawn (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Dems and NT’s, please keep underestimating him

    Him who? Pretty sure Trump’s big part in this will be signing his name and taking credit after all the heavy lifting is over.

    Trump was the conductor. Everyone played their part.

    • #46
  17. blood thirsty neocon Inactive
    blood thirsty neocon
    @bloodthirstyneocon

    Fritz (View Comment):

    The King Prawn (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Dems and NT’s, please keep underestimating him

    Him who? Pretty sure Trump’s big part in this will be signing his name and taking credit after all the heavy lifting is over.

    Well, I think a major part the President played in this was providing a spine transplant to Senate GOP’ers.

    First, there was the bipartisan televised confab on immigration issues with the President acting reasonable and open to ideas. Then there was his rejecting Schumer’s reported offering of “authorization” of funds for the wall, which the WH immediately shot down as illusory because “authorization” is not actually “appropriation” of funds. Last, there is Trump telling Schumer “no” when he made his last reported trip to the WH with a list of additional things he was asking for to get the Dems to quit their obstruction to funding the government.

    If Congress could respond to Trump’s lead like this more often, good things will happen. But then the GOP isn’t known as the stupid party for nothing, so I will not count on anything till it occurs..

    I have to wonder if the ****hole comment made Dems overconfident. Would they have overplayed their hand so badly without that little sideshow? I’m not sayin’ it’s 3d chess, but…

    • #47
  18. Arizona Patriot Member
    Arizona Patriot
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Over the weekend, the conservative Washington Examiner noted that a 43 year old Medical Doctor was detained by ICE. He had a Green Card. He was brought to the U.S when he was 3 years old.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    There is a massive distinction between the 10 million illegal aliens who came here as adults, and the 700,000 young adults who were brought here as children. You undercut your argument by not noting that the limited issue is DACA and not people who came here as adults.

    Gary, I have a few comments.

    First, the 43 year old M.D. does not qualify to me as a ” young adult.” I have initial sympathy for his case, especially as a refugee from communist Poland.  His case, however, does not seem to implicate DACA. He obtained a green card in 1989, and became a lawful permanent resident. The issue in his case is revocation of that status as a result of multiple criminal convictions. It is troubling that two of  the convictions apparently occurred in the early 1990s, but he had another conviction for DUI in 2008, and a domestic violence trial in 2013 (though he was found not guilty). These facts are from a Chicago Tribune article.

    This is not a very sympathetic character, on further investigation.

    About the other “young adults,” I have become less sympathetic over the years. If they are still living with their parents, they should be sent home with their parents.  Otherwise you have to allow parents to stay also, and they are double wrongdoers, having both come here illegally themselves and having brought a child here illegally. Or you have to split up the family.

    If our hypothetical young adult is independent of his parents, then he is old enough to warrant less sympathy. I would make a decision based on whether or not he is a productive member of society.

    In either case, for the young adults, chances are good that they speak the language of their home country, as second generation immigrants generally do.

    It seems to me that legitimate prosecutorial discretion, applied in individual cases, is the best path forward. I do not see any need to prioritize DACA as a political matter.

    I do not understand the politics that has led to consideration of DACA as a stand-alone measure. At a minimum, since the Democrats seem so eager on this issue, it seems more sensible to extract some concessions on other immigration matters.

     

    • #48
  19. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    The King Prawn (View Comment):

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Dems and NT’s, please keep underestimating him

    Him who? Pretty sure Trump’s big part in this will be signing his name and taking credit after all the heavy lifting is over.

    blood thirsty neocon (View Comment):
    Trump was the conductor. Everyone played their part.

    I think the truth lies somewhere between these two statements. It’s a little raw, KP, to say Trump’s only part in this is to sign his name and take all the credit…which he certainly will do. But the Congressional Republicans certainly held the line. So for this brief moment, kudos to both POTUS and Congress. I’m not overly excited. This was a short reprieve, barely a skirmish was fought. The battle is not close to having been won.

     

    • #49
  20. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    cdor (View Comment):
    So for this brief moment, kudos to both POTUS and Congress. I’m not overly excited. This was a short reprieve, barely a skirmish was fought. The battle is not close to having been won.

    Indeed.

    • #50
  21. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Arizona Patriot (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Over the weekend, the conservative Washington Examiner noted that a 43 year old Medical Doctor was detained by ICE. He had a Green Card. He was brought to the U.S when he was 3 years old.

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    There is a massive distinction between the 10 million illegal aliens who came here as adults, and the 700,000 young adults who were brought here as children. You undercut your argument by not noting that the limited issue is DACA and not people who came here as adults.

    Gary, I have a few comments.

    First, the 43 year old M.D. does not qualify to me as a ” young adult.” I have initial sympathy for his case, especially as a refugee from communist Poland. His case, however, does not seem to implicate DACA. He obtained a green card in 1989, and became a lawful permanent resident. The issue in his case is revocation of that status as a result of multiple criminal convictions. It is troubling that two of the convictions apparently occurred in the early 1990s, but he had another conviction for DUI in 2008, and a domestic violence trial in 2013 (though he was found not guilty). These facts are from a Chicago Tribune article.

    This is not a very sympathetic character, on further investigation.

    About the other “young adults,” I have become less sympathetic over the years. If they are still living with their parents, they should be sent home with their parents. Otherwise you have to allow parents to stay also, and they are double wrongdoers, having both come here illegally themselves and having brought a child here illegally. Or you have to split up the family.

    If our hypothetical young adult is independent of his parents, then he is old enough to warrant less sympathy. I would make a decision based on whether or not he is a productive member of society.

    In either case, for the young adults, chances are good that they speak the language of their home country, as second generation immigrants generally do.

    It seems to me that legitimate prosecutorial discretion, applied in individual cases, is the best path forward. I do not see any need to prioritize DACA as a political matter.

    I do not understand the politics that has led to consideration of DACA as a stand-alone measure. At a minimum, since the Democrats seem so eager on this issue, it seems more sensible to extract some concessions on other immigration matters.

    In January 1992, he was convicted of two Misdeamnors.  Under applicable Michigan law those convictions were expunged from his record, a distinction that ICE.

    As for the DUI, the Chicago Tribune article states that after he completed probation, the charge was dismissed.

    He was found innocent of domestic violence after a jury trial.

    Being deported for two misdeamnors committed when he was a teen, and a single DUI, seems draconian to me.

    i am all for deporting gang members, but not a 43 physician whose record, While not spotless, does not include any felony convictions, and whose three offenses over 26 years were all expunged and/or dismissed.

    Dr. Nice supervised other doctors in five hospitals.  He had worked a week straight including pulling double shifts due to widespread influenza.  Hopefully no one will be put at risk by this ICE stunt.

    • #51
  22. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    I noticed that the 15 Democrats voting against ending the filibuster include all the Senators with possible national aspirations in 2020: Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Chris Murphy.

    And Bernie Sanders.

    • #52
  23. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I noticed that the 15 Democrats voting against ending the filibuster include all the Senators with possible national aspirations in 2020: Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Chris Murphy.

    And Bernie Sanders.

    Good.

    • #53
  24. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I noticed that the 15 Democrats voting against ending the filibuster include all the Senators with possible national aspirations in 2020: Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Chris Murphy.

    And Bernie Sanders.

    This is all they got?

    • #54
  25. Hypatia Member
    Hypatia
    @

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    The Dems miscalculated in deciding to hold the health of American children hostage in exchange for getting special treatment for illegal immigrants.

    There is a massive distinction between the 10 million illegal aliens who came here as adults, and the 700,000 young adults who were brought here as children. You undercut your argument by not noting that the limited issue is DACA and not people who came here as adults.

    Well,unless we get rid of chain migration, if the DACA bozos are allowed to stay, so will mom’n dad and a myriad other relatives.   So there is no “massive distinction”. And there!s no “limiting” the tide if we don’t hold the dam.  It’s all one big poisonous morass.

    And these “kids” are the children of criminals, and, under Buraq Hussain’s illegal policy, they are still qualified even if they have 2 misdemeanor convictions each , plus an undisclosed number of juvenile offenses.  Awww, how cute!

    These are the individuals for whom the Dems are willing to sacrifice rights and privileges of American citizens.

    I’m just so happy the Dems’ position has been exposed for what it is: the one and only thing they care about is maintaining control by importing and protecting huge numbers  of  foreigners: people so anxious to get in here they’ll risk any hardship–just so they can march down America’s streets brandishing the flags of the countries they were so desperate to get out of?   Dems have bent every resource toward that goal since Kennedy’s treasonous legislation in 1965.

    • #55
  26. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    cdor (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I noticed that the 15 Democrats voting against ending the filibuster include all the Senators with possible national aspirations in 2020: Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Chris Murphy.

    And Bernie Sanders.

    This is all they got?

    You could have put Barack Obama on a similar list in 2006 and we would have all reacted the same.  You never know.  I think what it illustrates is that for all the media hollaring about how allegedly extreme the GOP has become, it is the leading Dems that have moved in the more radical direction because it is the radicals in their party who control the nominating process.

    • #56
  27. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    And that is fine. Anything that comes out of it must pass the House. I don’t think DACA gets through the House unless we also get chain migration, E verify, and visa lottery addressed and the Democrats will choke on this.

    Do you think there aren’t enough Republicans that would vote with Dems to push what comes out of the Senate past the more hard line House members? What then?

    I also don’t really see how the Dems leverage changes with respect to DACA and Government funding if by February they don’t have a DACA deal in place they can still kill the new continuing resolution then. I mean they have shown that maybe their heart isn’t in it. But who knows? If Trump steps hard in it with some new tweet at the time they will have to wave their bloody shirt around, and we are back to the ping pong game.

     

    • #57
  28. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    cdor (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I noticed that the 15 Democrats voting against ending the filibuster include all the Senators with possible national aspirations in 2020: Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and Chris Murphy.

    And Bernie Sanders.

    This is all they got?

    You overlooked Oprah.

    • #58
  29. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Hypatia (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    The Dems miscalculated in deciding to hold the health of American children hostage in exchange for getting special treatment for illegal immigrants.

    There is a massive distinction between the 10 million illegal aliens who came here as adults, and the 700,000 young adults who were brought here as children. You undercut your argument by not noting that the limited issue is DACA and not people who came here as adults.

    Well,unless we get rid of chain migration, if the DACA bozos

    “bozos”?  Are you kidding?  How is a young adult a clown?

    are allowed to stay, so will mom’n dad and a myriad other relatives.

    So make the law clear that they can’t employ chain migration.

    So there is no “massive distinction”. And there!s no “limiting” the tide if we don’t hold the dam. It’s all one big poisonous morass.

    I live in the Border State of Arizona.  I haven’t perceived the DACA kids to be “poisonous.”

    And these “kids” are the children of criminals, and, under Buraq Hussain’s illegal policy, they are still qualified even if they have 2 misdemeanor convictions each , plus an undisclosed number of juvenile offenses. Awww, how cute!

    Well, it certainly didn’t protect the 43 year old Michigan Doctor who came here at the age of 3 from Poland, was taken into custody by ICE, due to two misdeamnors 26 years ago that had been set aside by the Courts.

    These are the individuals for whom the Dems are willing to sacrifice rights and privileges of American citizens.

    I am a citizen.  What rights and privileges of mine would be sacrificed?

    I’m just so happy the Dems’ position has been exposed for what it is: the one and only thing they care about is maintaining control by importing and protecting huge numbers of foreigners:

    The purpose of DACA is to protect young adults who were brought here by their parents.

    people so anxious to get in here they’ll risk any hardship–just so they can march down America’s streets brandishing the flags of the countries they were so desperate to get out of? Dems have bent every resource toward that goal since Kennedy’s treasonous legislation in 1965.

    I don’t agree with Teddy Kennedy’s bill, but please explain how it was “treasonous”?

    i suggest that you avoid hyperbole in the future, otherwise you call your credibility into question.

    • #59
  30. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    And that is fine. Anything that comes out of it must pass the House. I don’t think DACA gets through the House unless we also get chain migration, E verify, and visa lottery addressed and the Democrats will choke on this.

    Do you think there aren’t enough Republicans that would vote with Dems to push what comes out of the Senate past the more hard line House members? What then?

    I also don’t really see how the Dems leverage changes with respect to DACA and Government funding if by February they don’t have a DACA deal in place they can still kill the new continuing resolution then. I mean they have shown that maybe their heart isn’t in it. But who knows? If Trump steps hard in it with some new tweet at the time they will have to wave their bloody shirt around, and we are back to the ping pong game.

    DACA is statutorily going to end in March.  Historically, many conservative Republicans in the House refuse to vote for expanding the debt limit, and require Dems to vote for it.  Unless we enact some DACA legislation, I don’t know many Dems in the House to vote for the debt ceiling.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.