Wouldn't that still leave ObamaCare unfunded? Without a bill, explicit funding will note be allocated to ObamaCare.
Just asking, not looking to stir up an argument. The thought just occurred to me; I'm a little slow on the uptake.
Yes, it will leave Obamacare unfunded but it will also leave “the government” unfunded.
There would be no spending bill approved so the government would “shut down,” whatever that means. (I am sure they would find money to keep the lights and heat on at the White House, and likely to throw lavish dinners and parties too...oh and Air Force One would continue to zip around the airspace like a deranged bottlefly...)
Some kind of spending bill will eventually have to be passed, just because the media and the fifty or so percent of the populace who depend on handouts will make the alternative unacceptable.
I don’t suppose the Senate will have the stones to defund Obamacare and pass the stripped-down spending bill to the Prez.
But I wish they would. Let him veto it. Let him shut down the government. My goodness it would be like tearing up his golf pass for the year.
Don’t know. I thought it was already being funded. I assumed, maybe incorrectly, that once a bill was passed into law, it had to be funded. But you might be right.
Budgets are annual things, or are supposed to be. Nothing is funded for more than a year at a time.