White House could provoke a spending showdown over funding for border wall

[Jtbrig7390]

This is just fucken golden...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/power...html?tid=ss_tw

White House budget director Mick Mulvaney said Thursday that he hopes to use negotiations to keep the government open past April 28 in an effort to force Democrats to back some funding for creating a new wall along the U. S-Mexico border — a risky move that could provoke a spending showdown with congressional Democrats next week.

Mulvaney said the White House would be open to funding some of the Democrats’ priorities — such as paying insurance subsidies under the Affordable Care Act — if Democrats agree to fund some of the more controversial parts of President Trump’s agenda, notably the border wall.

The new request threatens to undermine weeks of negotiations between Republican leaders and Democrats in Congress to pass a stopgap spending bill to avoid a government shutdown. The negotiations so far have excluded talk of the border wall, which Republicans have argued should be taken up later to keep the government open.

“We have our list of priorities,” Mulvaney said at an event hosted by the Institute of International Finance. “We want more money for defense. We want to build a border wall. We want more money for immigration enforcement, law enforcement.”

Mulvaney stopped short of saying that the White House would refuse to sign a spending agreement that does not include those priorities, but he made clear that he expects Democrats to reopen talks. Democrats saw Mulvaney’s comments as evidence that the White House is meddling to undermine what they described as successful, bipartisan talks.

“Everything had been moving smoothly until the administration moved in with a heavy hand,” said Matt House, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). “Not only are Democrats opposed to the wall, there is significant Republican opposition as well.”

[White House turns up heat on Congress to revise the Affordable Care Act]

Republican leaders and members of the House and Senate appropriations committees had hoped to avoid a spending confrontation early in Trump’s administration by negotiating directly with Democrats, whose votes will be necessary to pass any spending bill. Republicans hold a slim 52-to-48 advantage in the Senate, meaning they will need at least eight Democrats to reach the 60 votes required to pass spending measures in that chamber.

Drew Hammill, a spokesman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), said the White House comments make it “more difficult” to reach an agreement, arguing that there is intense opposition to the wall from Democrats in both the House and Senate.

Mulvaney said that the White House is willing to negotiate, but only if Democrats bend on funding the wall.
“If they tell us to pound sand, I think that’s probably a disappointing indicator of where the next four years is going to go,” Mulvaney said. “If they tell us, however, that they recognize that President Trump won an election, and he should get some of his priorities funded for that reason, elections have consequences, as folks who win always like to say.”

“I will shut down the government unless Democrats pay for the wall I said Mexico would pay for.” Genius..........

[BrerBear]

Let him shut the government down, then. He's going to be dancing between one broken promise (Mexico funding the wall) and taking health care away from millions.
Maybe he just wants to be even more unpopular than he historically is.

[Jtbrig7390]

Let him shut the government down, then. He's going to be dancing between one broken promise (Mexico funding the wall) and taking health care away from millions.
Maybe he just wants to be even more unpopular than he historically is.

Its just fucken amazing how much of a shit show this has turned into.

[Xyonai]

Because that'll play well in the midterms.

[Glnger]

Its just fucken amazing how much of a shit show this has turned into.

I specifically recall people voting for him just for that exactly...

[flashfarts]

lol they're still going on about that stupid wall?

[Jtbrig7390]

I specifically recall people voting for him just for that exactly...

Ya too many people voted him in just so the other side wouldn't win. It was a dick waving contest to those people and nothing more.

[ati87]

Would really like to see anybody defending this crap.

Pretty sure this is borderline terrorism when you demand something in exchange for not blowing shit up.

Why does Trump even need money for a wall? Their is not a realistic plan out there so why would he even need money at this point.

[Damajin]

Would really like to see anybody defending this crap.

Pretty sure this is borderline terrorism when you demand something in exchange for not blowing shit up.

Why does Trump even need money for a wall? Their is not a realistic plan out there so why would he even need money at this point.

That's amusing because it was Schumer embracing the shutdown talk less than a month ago. So is it still borderline terrorism? Or is it ok because it's for the Good Cause(TM)?

Don't act so righteous when your guys behave like the other guys.

[Jtbrig7390]

That's amusing because it was Schumer embracing the shutdown talk less than a month ago. So is it still borderline terrorism? Or is it ok because it's for the Good Cause(TM)?

Don't act so righteous when your guys behave like the other guys.

Don't deflect, Its wrong for ether side to shutdown the government just because they are not getting there way. This thread isn't about Schumer its about Trump so stay on topic and don't deflect.

[Belize]

I thought the wall was just a "concept". A metaphor if you will.

Haha.

[kail]

And here I thought Mexico was going to pay for it .

[Damajin]

Don't deflect, Its wrong for ether side to shutdown the government just because they are not getting there way. This thread isn't about Schumer its about Trump so stay on topic and don't deflect.

Except that the notion that Democrats and Schumer especially being the main guy have no part in any shutdown is disingenuous.

Trump and his administration are putting forth their priorities no different than any other President and their administration do so the outrage here is purely partisan chess move bullshit.

Furthermore I'll say what I like.

[Ravenblade]

So basically this "We will build a huge beautiful wall and Mexico will pay for it!" turns into a "We will have some Mexican, Chinese or German construction company build some affordable wall and the American taxpayer will pay for it; at one point later we will pretend that through some superficial but barely noticeable financial measures Mexico helped financing it!". I mean it is such a snappy slogan. Almost fits on the side of a red bus...

[Adolecent]

Its just fucken amazing how much of a shit show this has turned into.

Thats exactly what the alt-right wanted, and what the conservatives knew to expect.

[melodramocracy]

And here I thought Mexico was going to pay for it .

So did most of his voters. Goes to show how clueless many 'murkins actually are.

[I Push Buttons]

I thought the wall was just a "concept". A metaphor if you will.

Haha.

Nah its pretty easy to spot GOP metaphors... When they say "small government", "middle class", and "small businesses"... They actually mean huge government, rich people, and corporations.

[melodramocracy]

So basically this "We will build a huge beautiful wall and Mexico will pay for it!" turns into a "We will have some Mexican, Chinese or German construction company build some affordable wall and the American taxpayer will pay for it; at one point later we will pretend that through some superficial but barely noticeable financial measures Mexico helped financing it!". I mean it is such a snappy slogan. Almost fits on the side of a red bus...

Someone on this very forum argued that Trump could end aid that is currently sent to Mexico and divert that money towards wall construction, and that therefore would be how Mexico would pay for it. I can only assume this person was serious in their statement.

If it gets built at all, the most realistic scenario is that taxpayers will pay twice for the wall.. once through taxation, and again through higher prices as a result of tarriffs on imports from that region (marketed, of course, as an effort to recoup said construction costs).

[Dug]

Someone on this very forum argued that Trump could end aid that is currently sent to Mexico and divert that money towards wall construction, and that therefore would be how Mexico would pay for it. I can only assume this person was serious in their statement.

If it gets built at all, the most realistic scenario is that taxpayers will pay twice for the wall.. once through taxation, and again through higher prices as a result of tarriffs on imports from that region (marketed, of course, as an effort to recoup said construction costs).

Anything to convince themselves that it isn't a shit idea.

[Felya]

Except that the notion that Democrats and Schumer especially being the main guy have no part in any shutdown is disingenuous.

It would be, if anyone was saying that, but you literally responded to someone saying it's both, but stay on topic. Which makes you disengenous... clearly and emphatically.

- - - Updated - - -

Someone on this very forum argued that Trump could end aid that is currently sent to Mexico and divert that money towards wall construction, and that therefore would be how Mexico would pay for it. I can only assume this person was serious in their statement.

If it gets built at all, the most realistic scenario is that taxpayers will pay twice for the wall.. once through taxation, and again through higher prices as a result of tarriffs on imports from that region (marketed, of course, as an effort to recoup said construction costs).

It wouldn't be twice, it would be annual, until we choose to stop supporting it. The wall would require maintenance and repairs...