Author Topic: NASA Plan for an "Orderly Shutdown" (Read 84696 times)

rdale · « **Reply #180 on:** 04/08/2011 11:58 pm »

Just in: White House, Congressional negotiators reach agreement on policy riders, haven't worked out final numbers - Politico

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #181 on:** 04/08/2011 11:59 pm »

Quote from: sdsds on 04/08/2011 11:52 pm

Chris Bergin, beware. If your website facilitates NASA employees communicating openly about their work, you might be accessory to a crime!

Oh no!! Take me away officer, it's a fair cop

northanger · « **Reply #182 on:** 04/09/2011 12:05 am »

TPM: there will be some kind of deal struck tonight.

Nothing to officially report, but they're running with it since there are some significant tells.

robertross · « **Reply #183 on:** 04/09/2011 12:14 am »

Quote from: rdale on 04/08/2011 11:28 pm

Again - that's the ramifications of a shutdown. It's illegal to work for free. Checking your corporate email isn't a hobby

I wouldn't work well in that kind of place.

yg1968 · « **Reply #184 on:** 04/09/2011 12:16 am »

CNN and Foxnews are saying that a short term clean one week CR may get passed by the House and Senate if a deal on the essentials is struck on the full year CR.

2552 · « **Reply #185 on:** 04/09/2011 12:32 am »

http://www.nationaljournal.com/white-house-reviewing-terms-of-spending-deal-20110408

Quote

The likelihood of a war-time federal government shutdown—the first in American history—diminished dramatically on Friday night as all parties began reviewing, with the goal of approving, a broad array of cuts and a short-term bill to keep the government operating while the details are put into legislative language for full congressional action next week.

Integrator · « **Reply #186 on:** 04/09/2011 01:15 am »

People are calling their congressmen in droves and complaining the Park Service will cancel the Washington DC Cherry Blossom festival parade tomorrow if we have a shutdown.

I'm serious.
[shrug]
Whatever works.

INTEGRATOR

Mark Max Q · « **Reply #187 on:** 04/09/2011 01:15 am »

No deal according to BBC News.

Top Democratic leader Harry Reid said both sides had agreed to $38bn (£23bn) in cuts but were unable to agree on Republican wishes not to allow federal funding for abortion.

But House Speaker John Boehner said the main issue was the level of cuts.

Unbelievable if it comes down to abortion!

yg1968 · « **Reply #188 on:** 04/09/2011 01:21 am »

Quote from: Mark Max Q on 04/09/2011 01:15 am

No deal according to BBC News.

Top Democratic leader Harry Reid said both sides had agreed to $38bn (£23bn) in cuts but were unable to agree on Republican wishes not to allow federal funding for abortion.

But House Speaker John Boehner said the main issue was the level of cuts.

Unbelievable if it comes down to abortion!

That's not the latest news, see here:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0411/52798.html

sdsds · « **Reply #189 on:** 04/09/2011 01:23 am »

Really want to avoid the politics, but a minor correction: Planned Parenthood is already barred from using federal dollars for abortion services. The issue is whether the federal government should support the other 97% of the services Planned Parenthood provides, given that (through other sources of funding) Planned Parenthood also provides abortion services.

(EDIT to add a source for assertion: http://www.ktiv.com/Global/story.asp?S=14413455)

asmolenski · « **Reply #190 on:** 04/09/2011 01:39 am »

Reportedly working on a 3 day 'extension' however, even that would require a vote and passage by both the House and then Senate and a signature from POTUS, all by midnight ET.

Chris Bergin · « **Reply #191 on:** 04/09/2011 01:42 am »

BBC mainly work off AP and wires, Mark. Very few inhouse journalists nowadays.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #192 on:** 04/09/2011 01:46 am »

Quote from: asmolenski on 04/09/2011 01:39 am

Reportedly working on a 3 day 'extension' however, even that would require a vote and passage by both the House and then Senate and a signature from POTUS, all by midnight ET.

Given they are always late and slow on everything, it's odd that such a thing can be done in a very short time, but it can. This is because the actual language of a continuing resolution is extremely short and thus needs very little review. This isn't always the case, but it is often the case. Here's an example of the entire bill text from one of them:

"The Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (Public Law 111-242) is amended by striking the date specified in section 106(3) and inserting `February 18, 2011'."

yg1968 · « **Reply #193 on:** 04/09/2011 02:14 am »

The latest news is that the Republicans and Democrats are getting close to a deal. The policy riders issue has been resolved.

Reid will talk at 11:15PM.

Lee Jay · « **Reply #194 on:** 04/09/2011 02:18 am »

Quote from: yg1968 on 04/09/2011 02:14 am

The latest news is that the Republicans and Democrats are getting close to a deal. The policy riders issue has been resolved.

Reid will talk at 11:15PM.

It's like a game of chicken where both drivers swerve and hit the brakes in time to avoid a head-on collision, but not in time to avoid a glancing blow.

northanger · « **Reply #195 on:** 04/09/2011 02:30 am »

Sounds like "three-day budget agreement" is intermediate step (deadline can't be met because getting word out to rank and file about actual budget deal is in process).

robertross · « **Reply #196 on:** 04/09/2011 02:36 am »

Source has told Dana Bash from CNN that a deal is done for the rest of the year.
To be confirmed

robertross · « **Reply #197 on:** 04/09/2011 02:39 am »

Also on CNN: a 'bandaid' budget (CR) until Thursday to get the full budget sorted.

psloss · « **Reply #198 on:** 04/09/2011 02:39 am »

Quote from: robertross on 04/09/2011 02:36 am

Source has told Dana Bash from CNN that a deal is done for the rest of the year.
To be confirmed

Referring to the negotiators -- they 'shook hands', but all the parties they're representing still have to agree.

A short-term CR would run into the middle of next week to give time to draft appropriations language for remainder of the the fiscal year.

psloss · « **Reply #199 on:** 04/09/2011 02:50 am »

Quote from: Lee Jay on 04/09/2011 01:46 am

Given they are always late and slow on everything, it's odd that such a thing can be done in a very short time, but it can. This is because the actual language of a continuing resolution is extremely short and thus needs very little review. This isn't always the case, but it is often the case. Here's an example of the entire bill text from one of them:

"The Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (Public Law 111-242) is amended by striking the date specified in section 106(3) and inserting `February 18, 2011'."

Yeah, assuming everyone signs off on this reported deal, that's still got to come to both floors tonight. Likely to see a unanimous request in the Senate rather than a full roll call vote and perhaps something similar in the House.