reSee.it - Related Video Feed

"This is political theater. I'm gonna call out both sides right here. It's all posturing. It's fake fighting." "We all know where it ends up. This is Groundhog Day." "We always get a c r in September, and then we get an omnibus." "We might get the omnibus before Christmas, but if we're not good, it comes after Christmas." "We should have done 12 separate bills." "But, again, whether Democrats are in control or Republicans are in control, we never do the 12 separate bills." "It's because Democrats wanna grow the welfare state, and republicans wanna grow the military industrial complex." "I guarantee it."

We're getting close to a number on appropriations, but Democrats are trying to add something new that's never been part of this before. They want to limit the executive branch's ability to do its job, which would tie the President's hands on expenditures. This is a gross separation of powers violation and a terrible precedent. It's a nonstarter for us, and the Democrats know that. So it looks like they're making individual appropriations bills almost impossible. There's more discussion to be had as we near the March 14 deadline. I'm hopeful they'll back off those outrageous demands because they're unprecedented and unconstitutional. The Democrats are likely trying to address the unitary theory of the executive, limiting the executive branch's ability to impound or rescind funds. This is a constitutional fight, and you likely won't get any Democrat votes on this CR. Get ready for a potential government shutdown.

The speaker criticizes both parties for engaging in "political theater" with the annual budget process, resulting in a continuing resolution (CR) and omnibus bill instead of 12 separate appropriations bills. Democrats want to grow the welfare state, and Republicans want to grow the military-industrial complex. The speaker highlights exposed lies and unconstitutional actions by various agencies, which will continue to be funded. The speaker points out that a previous debt limit increase included a provision for automatic 1% cuts if a CR extended past April 30th. The current CR is set to expire on March 28th to avoid triggering these cuts. A "bright shiny object," the SAVE Act, is attached to the CR, which is designed to prevent illegals from voting. The speaker predicts the SAVE Act will be removed, and Republicans will ultimately cave and fund the CR without it. The speaker refuses to participate in this "failure theater."

The best-case scenario, given the current situation, would be a clean continuing resolution (CR), but Democrats oppose that, leading to a standoff. The government is set to shut down on Friday, a choice made by Republican leadership. They could have extended funding longer, as Donald Trump suggested, but opted to push the issue to December to advance their own priorities. Now, they find themselves without a plan. It's crucial for Mike Johnson and his team to resolve this situation, as their current approach is problematic and they need to take responsibility for fixing it.

Democrats lack the power to shut down the government; the party controlling the House, Senate, and White House governs. Democrats can stop bad bills that strip programs from Americans, including veterans, air safety, and food safety. They also aim to prevent a slush fund for Elon Musk and Donald Trump, which could lead to cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security by decimating programs and services. The House, under Hakim Jeffries, voted almost unanimously against the legislation. The Senate Democrats have leverage to reject handing over tools and a slush fund to Elon Musk and Donald Trump.

Republicans are pushing for a government shutdown that could harm the economy and negatively impact working-class Americans. Their focus seems to be on providing significant tax cuts for wealthy donors instead of funding essential programs like cancer research for children.

My colleague from Oklahoma claims that not supporting Kevin McCarthy would cause chaos, but I disagree. Chaos is having $33 trillion in debt and a $2.2 trillion annual deficit. Chaos is not passing single subject spending bills and relying on continuing resolutions and omnibus bills. We need reforms that go beyond McCarthy's time in office, such as open amendments and a clear understanding of the budget. These changes would lead to legislative progress, even if it means sometimes losing or forming unexpected partnerships. The American people expect us to work hard and deliver, something Speaker McCarthy has failed to do. That's why I've called for his removal.

The speaker criticizes both parties for engaging in "political theater" with the annual budget process, resulting in continuing resolutions (CR) and omnibus bills. They claim that Democrats want to expand the welfare state, while Republicans want to expand the military-industrial complex, leading to increased spending regardless of which party is in power. The speaker highlights alleged lies and overreach by various government agencies, which they claim are consistently funded despite Republican opposition. They point out that a proposed 1% cut to spending, tied to a previous debt limit increase, is avoided by the speaker's choice of a 6-month CR. The speaker also dismisses the "SAVE Act" attached to the CR as a "bright shiny object" designed to excite Republicans, predicting it will be removed and never become law. They urge Republicans to fight for the Act, forcing Democrats to publicly support allowing "illegals to vote," but ultimately believes the CR will pass without it.

Here's the truth about what's happening in Congress: it's political theater, a repetitive cycle leading to a continuing resolution (CR) and then an omnibus bill, regardless of which party is in control. We never address the real issues, like reining in spending or cutting wasteful programs. Democrats want to expand the welfare state, and Republicans want to grow the military-industrial complex, and bureaucrats are being allowed to run wild. This CR is a six-month extension, strategically avoiding automatic cuts. The "SAVE Act" attached to it is just a shiny object, a false promise meant to appease Republicans before it disappears. We need to stop funding things we claim to oppose and address our spending addiction. I refuse to participate in this charade any longer.

Republicans' nihilism has brought the country to the brink of a government shutdown at midnight unless Congress acts. Democrats offered to fund the government for another month, but Republicans rejected this because Donald Trump wants full control over government spending. The choice is between proceeding with the bill or risking a shutdown, which would give Trump more power. While the Republican bill is deeply partisan and doesn't address many needs, allowing Trump to take more power via a shutdown is worse. No one wants a shutdown. Members who oppose the CR want Republicans to take their responsibilities more seriously and negotiate spending bills that address the needs of the American people. The Republican party is the party of Trump, and allowing him to take more power via a shutdown is a worse option than passing the CR.

My Republican colleagues, led by Donald Trump, are in a meltdown because their presidential nominee and policies are unpopular. They are pushing for a nationwide abortion ban and their project 2025 is failing. Democrats just want to focus on moving the country forward and prioritizing people over politics.

Hi, Andy Biggs here from Arizona's 5th congressional district. This week, we're set to vote on a continuing resolution that will extend spending for another three months instead of passing an annual budget. This ongoing issue contributes to our structural deficit and increasing national debt. The current resolution is packed with various policy issues, effectively turning it into a short-term omnibus bill. Unfortunately, this approach won't address our budget imbalance or eliminate poor policies; it merely adds more to secure votes. This highlights the dysfunction in Congress when we rely on continuing resolutions instead of a proper budget. I'll keep you updated.

In the post from earlier today, two Republicans voted nay to stall the government funding bill, but it ended up being only one again: Thomas Massey. The comments that followed labeled Massey a rhino, a democrat, and a grandstander. The speaker then presents Massey’s own explanation for voting against the omnibus, highlighting a breakdown of what Massey calls the most ridiculous items included, including some “America first” items that were not. Massey’s stated rationale includes: - $5,000,000,000 to provide cash benefits, health care, day care, and job programs to refugees on the taxpayer dime. - $315,000,000 to fund the CIA’s branch of the State Department that propagandizes and destabilizes the globe and has an interest in censoring and attacking conservative media outlets. - $3,300,000,000 to our greatest ally, President Trump, with an extra $500,000,000 for the greatest ally. - $1,500,000,000 to Egypt. - $2,100,000,000 to the Jordanians. - Nearly $700,000,000 to foreign HIV/AIDS programs. - Additional items described as America first that Massey says they refused to include. Massey also cites amendments he would have supported but were blocked: - The amendment to freeze funds for the daycare fraud. - The amendment to stop warrantless surveillance of Americans via loopholes in the FISA act. - The amendment to prevent the kill switch on your personal vehicle. - The amendment to end propagandizing US citizens by the State Department and the US Agency for Global Media. - The amendment to stop the creation of CBNCs (which relates to financial surveillance and control of your wall). - The Save Act was included by someone, described as “Grimstander” in the narrative. The discourse portrays Massey as a traitor to America and a grandstander, with tweets and reactions framing him as disloyal to President Trump. The speaker’s compilation emphasizes that if Massey is called a traitor for these positions, others might be viewed similarly, urging readers to compare actions across the broader political landscape.

I don't support Kevin McCarthy as Speaker because he can't be trusted and has caused chaos. The real chaos is the $33 billion debt, $2.2 trillion annual deficit, and the lack of passing single subject spending bills. We've been governed by continuing resolutions and omnibus bills since the mid-90s, which is chaotic. We need reforms like open amendments and understanding the budget. If we had these reforms, there would be times when my conservative colleagues and I would lose, but the American people would see us legislating. Speaker McCarthy hasn't delivered, so I've moved to vacate the chair.

Appropriations is where the money moves in Congress. Democrats are making lives smoother through government funding. Republicans' Project 2025 is suspect, aiming to eliminate the Department of Education. This would negatively impact the environment, education, and rights. Democrats are keeping people informed.

Nancy Mace discusses the ongoing budget issues in Washington, expressing frustration over the last-minute negotiations. She notes that Congress has had ample time to address the budget since the last short-term continuing resolution (CR) was passed on September 26. Mace voted against the recent bill because it maintained the same spending levels as before. She advocates for a short-term CR until Trump takes office, emphasizing the need for separate votes on various spending issues. Mace believes there are solutions available that would ensure essential services continue even in a government shutdown. She remains committed to negotiating a resolution before the deadline, stating her dedication to the American people and Trump.

Things are coming together to save our republic. President Trump and his people need a clear field to run through this year, and Freedom Caucus level conservatives like me are in full support of the work President Trump is doing. The final bit of leverage that the Democrats have is the threat of shutting down the government. We have to get past that, and we're going to get past that in just a few days. Don't worry about the CR through September. This is a new deal rolling right now, and the president needs our full support, and he's gonna get it. I'll keep you posted, but we have things well in hand. Our country is on the verge of really beautiful growth and prosperity. Hang in there, America, we're gonna be okay.

The speaker presents a conditional scenario directed at the president: if the president said today that he would be happy to meet with the Democrats if they stop holding the government hostage, then Democrats could walk in tonight, pass the continuing resolution (CR), and provide seven weeks. The speaker believes the president could then bring everyone together, and that the Democrats would likely negotiate on a number of issues and reach an agreement. The speaker emphasizes that the president does not want to negotiate under duress. This point is tied to a claim about Democratic sentiment: anonymously, a Democrat senator told the speaker that none of them want to vote to open the government because, in their words, “we’d face the guillotine.” The speaker notes that these words came “from our base,” suggesting this is the view of the president’s political allies or supporters. In summarizing the exchange, the speaker asserts that this line of reasoning reflects a critical dynamic in the current standoff: the possibility that a straightforward, pressure-free offer from the president to engage with Democrats could break the deadlock and lead to a constructive dialogue on policy issues. The implication is that the threat or perception of political duress is a barrier to reaching a resolution, and that a different approach—one that signals openness to negotiation without coercion—might unlock bipartisan progress. The transcript includes the assertion that if the president were to publicly welcome negotiations under a non-duress framework, there would be movement toward a compromise on multiple issues, facilitated by a temporary timeline (seven weeks) and a renewed, inclusive negotiation process. The speaker underscores the idea that such an approach could shift dynamics away from fear of political punishment within the base toward substantive agreement. Towards the end, the speaker remarks, “Look. Think you just made a very important,” indicating that the argument is intended to highlight a potentially pivotal point about how the administration’s stance could influence willingness to engage and resolve the government funding impasse. The transcript ends with this incomplete thought, leaving the broader implications implied but not fully explicit.

The Musk Johnson proposal lacks seriousness and is seen as laughable. Extreme MAGA Republicans are pushing us toward a government shutdown. Are you considering the possibility of regretting not supporting a clean debt ceiling agreement?

Republican rejection leads to a Hobson's choice: proceed with the bill or risk a shutdown orchestrated by Donald Trump. While the CR bill is bad, a shutdown would be much worse for America. The Republican bill is a terrible option. It is not a clean CR and is deeply partisan, failing to address many of the country's needs. However, allowing Donald Trump to take more power via a government shutdown is a far worse option. No one on my side of the aisle wants a government shutdown. Members who support this CR do not want a government shutdown, and members who oppose this CR do not want a government shutdown.

Day two of the "Democrat shutdown." 44 Senate Democrats voted to reject the "completely nonpartisan, completely clean, very simple 24 page continuing resolution" the House passed two weeks ago, instead of keeping the government open for seven weeks. Republicans say they moved in good faith: 12 appropriations bills passed by committees, the Senate and House have acted, and a conference committee finalized. With a September 30 deadline, the clean CR would allow more time for negotiations. Democrats filed a counter proposal described as a "wild list of partisan priorities," including "a half a billion dollars to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting" and removing the "rural hospital fund," while "repealing the health provisions of the one big beautiful bill," "ending Obamacare funding for noncitizens," and "Medicaid funding for those improperly granted asylum and parole." They claim at least "$200,000,000,000" would go to illegal aliens. They urge Americans to call their senators to open the government now, blaming Schumer for the shutdown.

I hope someone can get enough votes to become Speaker of the House. The recent funding bill doesn't address border security, funds abortion and DEI, and promotes trans ideology to young kids. We need real leadership to restore safety and security for all Americans. I'm ready to fight for victory in the upcoming election to bring greatness back to our country, which is currently lacking under the Democrats and Biden administration.

Do Democrats wanna prioritize the health care of illegal aliens over a government shutdown? Because if the government does shut down, Americans will be able furlough. We're not prioritizing. What we're doing is saying simply we wanna keep the government open, and we wanna work with the Republicans and have a bipartisan agreement to keep this government open, and health care is at the top of our agenda. But are Democrats demanding health care for illegal aliens? Democrats are demanding health care for everybody. We want to save lives. We wanna make sure that health care is available to those who would die but having the help of their government. So you're good with the government shutdown even if it means giving health care to people who aren't American citizens? We want to save health care for all people.