You can tell what a person prioritizes by what they are willing to shut the government over.

I think you should shut down the gov whenever your party get beaten badly in an election. That show the voters their dumb mistake.

 

Yea, I wouldn’t rule it out... but it’s started as nothing more than a political ploy that has gotten worse over the year.

 

And punish the states that didn’t vote for by defunding their disaster relief.

That’ll teach them.

 

I wouldn't shut down the government for either of those things. I might shut down the government to get an overhaul of the budgeting system that allows high officials to shut down the government -- literally a shut down to end all shut downs.

There are some people on a public-service-to-lobbyist career track. This situation is created by a non-market-based compensation structure in government that pays public servants less than they would otherwise command, so they can seek to monetize it in lobbying. The problem is that these officials may refrain from doing the right thing in office to avoid pissing off an entity they want to work for later. The only saving grace is that their are myriad interests looking to hire ex-officials as lobbyists, so if you anger one constituency, you might please another. Still, not a good situation. The lobbying ban can help in this regard because it increases the opportunity costs for politicians to take this career track.

At the same time, I think people undervalue lobbyists. Lobbyists are a shadow-industry that makes our Legislature go. Legislators can't know every issue, know every industry. They also can't write all these bills and form all these alliances. Lobbyists facilitate a lot of this work. And it is very valuable for the lobbying industry to get people who understand how the nitty-gritty of government works, how to get deals done, the history on particular issues, have relationships, etc. Too hard a ban on officials-turned-lobbyists eliminates a lot of expertise and the Legislature will not be as effective. The other problem with a ban -- which we saw with Trump's ban -- is that the lobbyists become "consultants." Maybe they can't go to legislators' offices like a lobbyist, but they can still get paid for their previous loyalty, which is the problem you're trying to address.

I actually don't see a problem with people coming from lobbying and taking jobs in government. I think that's great. They bring their expertise into government. Warren seems to worry that they'll have some lingering corporate loyalties, but from what I've seen of lobbyists once you stop paying their retainer you might as well be dead. Of course, there is a risk that such a person is just in temporarily and will return to lobbying, making them essentially a double-agent with a deferred compensation plan.

Ultimately, officials don't have to listen to lobbyists. Legislation like this is like telling a girl to cover up because you can't control your own sexual impulses. They are just making an argument. It's on the official if he's going to compromise himself for a campaign donation or the hope of some future employment (an explicit offer of course would be official corruption and a whole other ball of wax). I think the problems around lobbyists are generally not as bad as what some reformers and populists would intimate. And ultimately, the industry would adjust to all of these reforms and keep on going.

 

They do not start off as subject matter experts. But corporate lobbying relationships tend to be long-lived, and the corporations that retain them have a department to manage the lobbyists and to educate them on the issues the industry faces and the needs of the corporation to address those issues. That government affairs department is filled with industry subject matter experts and they use the lobbyist as their spokesperson. The lobbyist might not be expert enough (or have the authorization) to get creative in real-time in a legislator's office, but the expertise is there.

 

I think we should shut it down more often to prove how useless government programs are. Can I vote for both?

 

The off ramp stuff (where you can go when you leave politics) is good

The on ramp stuff is bad, it would limit elected/admin officials to basically lifetime swampers (the only way to get anywhere that would give someone enough power and access and not be in conflict with that law would have been part of the political and banking system your whole life).

It's basically a you must be one of us, not one of them set of laws, and i do not for one second believe that's an "unintended consequence"

 

I have no doubt that many trump supporters believe this. One reason why Americans are increasingly blaming trump for this shutdown.

 

I dont get why people keep perpetuating this comment when Trump has stated multiple times it is him keeping the government shut down.

 

Perhaps I am not reading this correctly... if trump himself states (multiple times) that is him keeping the government shut down, why don't you get it?

 

Off the top of my head, I would gladly shut down the government to get real border security, which would have to include further barriers and I would shut down the government to force some fiscal responsibility on the two parties. Those are 2 very legitimate reasons to shut it down.

 

Trump is clearly a Russian agent - he is doing Putin's bidding by bankrupting our country and shutting down the government.

He is a traitorous ass....who should be tried and if found guilty shot by a firing squad.

DD

 

My guess is that since the President himself took responsibility for the shutdown, there is no need to find reasons the shutdown is on him.

 

When Trump said he is taking responsible for the shutdown, that's the end of it. He will take the responsibility. Now that he has said that, when he doesn't take responsibility for it, you don't need to point it out.

 

Eh, I think you’re probably self-aware enough to realize you’re playing contrarion at this point..yet you do it anyway. Attention seeking at its finest. But it’s okay, polls indicate that the American public agree that Trump is to blame for this debacle

 

I'm really not, despite the rhetoric from the media that would have you ignore the truth, there is a problem at the border and physical barriers DO work. We all knew this not that long ago, but apparently when the DNC sent out new talking points quite a few people were willing to flip flop on the subject.

When it comes to who is "to blame", what are you talking about specifically? Illegal immigration? The government shutdown?

The answer to both is that obstructionism from Democrats is to blame.....and I'm sure you're self-aware enough to realize that but I understand the contrarian stance you've taken here.

 

“Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall!” The wall is a statement more than a solution. It’s a campaign promise by Trump. To most of us it’s a symbol of division that would be largely ineffective anyway. It’s politics; that’s all it is. You know it’s not the answer.

We had a bill in place to fund the government ...I don’t place any blame on republicans or democrats here. The man in the Oval Office needs to do the mature thing and drop it. He likely won’t save his presidency but that’s a foregone conclusion anyway