The question being clarified is whether the House can act unilaterally. It can’t as regards spending, which is contrary to what the author of the article seems to imply.
>>The question being clarified is whether the House can act unilaterally. It can’t as regards spending, which is contrary to what the author of the article seems to imply.<<
But the House can act unilaterally in the sense the author of the article proposes. If they don’t pass a spending bill, the government shuts down. However, the House did pass such a bill, and the current CR now extends past the election, so the only sensible discussion of his proposal would assume a post-election scenario, which is what I did.
He also stated: “Boehner seems … chilly to that idea. Any theories why? Anyone want to hazard a guess as to why, four months before an election, he doesn’t want to commit to a new, protracted government shutdown..”
In stating that, he was apparently unaware that a budget has already been passed. As for the guess on a theory as to why Boehner doesn’t want to risk a shutdown, the answer is two-part: 1) He can’t; the budget is already in effect, and 2) We’ve seen how the GOP gets beat up when they threaten a shutdown under current circumstances. At least the last time around they got the sequester, but only by being willing to temporarily gut the military budget. (At least I hope it’s temporary.)