(NationalSentinel) Congress: Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney said Tuesday that President Donald J. Trump does not see a government shutdown as good thing generally speaking, but it could be if it results in correcting Congress’ broken budgeting and appropriations process.

As noted by Breitbart News, Mulvaney told reporters a government shutdown could be “good” if it “fixes Washington, D.C. permanently.”

A clearly frustrated Trump Trump tweeted out on Tuesday, “either elect more Republican Senators in 2010 or change the rules now to 51%. Our country needs a good “shutdown” in September to fix mess!”

Mulvaney was asked to explain Trump’s text about a shutdown being “good.”

“It’s not desirable … But you asked me what a good one would look like, and a good one would be something that fixes Washington, D.C. permanently,” he responded.

He stated further that the reason there is a discussion about a shutdown every few months “is because the appropriations process is broken.” He said the “the way it’s supposed to work, and it used to work” is when “the House passes an appropriations bill on a topic, the Senate then passes a bill on the same issue, before it goes to the conference committee, before that bill is placed on the president’s desk.”

Mulvaney said that, since he has worked in the government, this process has “never worked” the way it’s supposed to.

He noted further:

I don’t think it has functioned for the last decade. I’ve been here since 2011 and it has never worked. We want to get back to that process. But the reason we can’t get back to that process is because the Senate is requiring 60 votes on every single appropriations bill and that is forcing this discussion on continuing resolutions — which is a bad way to run the government — and forcing a discussion on shutdowns which is simply not productive.

The president wants to see Washington better, get better, get fixed, change the way it does business.

He’s right, of course. The Senate’s arcane rules are out of step with the modern political processes. Thanks to the hyper-partisanship heaped on the country largely by the Left, the 60-vote threshold in the upper chamber is unrealistic and has become an impediment to getting the important things done – like getting rid of a health care scheme that is destroying the system and passing a budget.

Some see the threshold as a necessary check on the majority, but why does there have to be another check on the majority? That’s what the House, the Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch are for. If the minority wants to govern, they need to figure out how to win more elections.

Meantime, the American people are stuck with this lousy process – and a majority party that loses even when it wins elections.


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x