[Torus34]

Quoting myself from another source:

"It is within the power of the Legislative branch of the government to end the partial shutdown of the government. It requires that the necessary spending bills be passed with a veto-proof majority.

"Taking this fact into consideration, it's possible to view the present situation as one in which the Congress of the United States of America is currently putting party considerations ahead of consideration for the separateness of the legislative branch -- its freedom from subservience, if you will -- from the administrative branch.

"It can be argued that on the issue of the wall funding, Senate Majority Leader Addison McConnell has done what is noted above. He has stated that he will not allow a bill concerning the wall funding to reach the floor of the Senate unless it is pre-approved by President of the United States of America Donald Trump. This essentially hands control of the Senate of the United States of America to the administrative branch on this issue."

[Torus34]

Expounding further, again a quote,

"There's a much larger issue at stake. As far as the federal budget goes, $US 5.7B is almost pocket change. It comes out to $17 per person for every man, woman and child in the country. As I said, pocket change.

"We are, however, a constitutional republic. Our constitution defines three separate governmental functions: the administration, the legislature and the judiciary. Each is to act as a check and balance to the other. No one of the three is to take control over the other two.

"At present, we see the Majority Leader of the Senate making the Senate subservient to the administration in legislation concerning the wall. That in itself should raise red flags for those concerned with the safety of the US Constitution. We also see the administration using a partial shutdown of the entire federal government in an attempt to impose legislation on the House of Representatives, where all bills concerning expenditures must originate. In essence, it is an attempt by the administrative branch to legislate. If the current attempt succeeds, we can expect it to be done again and again."

[One Degree]

There have been 22 shutdowns since 1976. This one is hardly setting a precedent. It is not a violation of the checks and balances, it is part of it.

[Torus34]

Sir, thank you for your response. With regard to your statement that, "This one is hardly setting a precedent.", it is the longest.

A shutdown in and of itself does not violate the checks and balances. The motives behind it and the responses to it are another matter, however.

Regards.

[One Degree]

Sir, thank you for your response. With regard to your statement that, "This one is hardly setting a precedent.", it is the longest.

A shutdown in and of itself does not violate the checks and balances. The motives behind it and the responses to it are another matter, however.

Regards.

The reason behind it is a polarized country. This is a result of Democrat tactics even though they try to blame Trump. Trump would never had been even nominated if Democrats had not already polarized the country by ignoring the residents of most of it.

[Torus34]

Sir, thank you for your response. You make assertions which cannot be traced to reputable references and which do not demonstrate a traceable cause and effect. I cannot reply further.

Regards.

[One Degree]

Sir, thank you for your response. You make assertions which cannot be traced to reputable references and which do not demonstrate a traceable cause and effect. I cannot reply further.

Regards.

You made assertions without quoting any ‘reliable source’ or demonstrating cause and effect. I pointed out a problem with your assertions based upon our shared knowledge.
My latest assertions are reasonable based upon shared knowledge. I am not an ideologue who believes others assertions are necessarily superior to our own ability to reason based upon shared knowledge.
My assertions are simply counters to your own assertions.
You started the thread, so it would be up to you to back up your assertions. You have already acknowledged you were wrong about Trump’s actions being against ‘checks and balances’. This was the point your title indicated was the purpose of the thread. I honestly don’t know what else is up for discussion.

[Torus34]

@One Degree.

OK. Let's discuss. Specifically, let's look at your statement in response to my OP, viz: 'The reason behind it is a polarized country.' It, in this instance, is assumed to be the present ongoing partial shutdown of the federal government.

It is a broad statement. it requires, in my opinion, additional information. There are all manner of polar opposites in this country. Does it [the statement] refer to the opinions of the American people regarding the need for a specific type of wall? Is it, rather, a reflection of popular opinion regarding the President of the United States of America Donald Trump? Once this has been determined, the next step is to examine causality and see if there is a traceable relationship between the defined polarization and the partial shutdown of the government, the willingness of Senate Majority Leader to turn over control of the Senate to the President in bringing votes for bills regarding the wall to a vote, etc..

And we're just looking at the first sentence of your post.

Regards.

[One Degree]

@One Degree.

OK. Let's discuss. Specifically, let's look at your statement in response to my OP, viz: 'The reason behind it is a polarized country.' It, in this instance, is assumed to be the present ongoing partial shutdown of the federal government.

It is a broad statement. it requires, in my opinion, additional information. There are all manner of polar opposites in this country. Does it [the statement] refer to the opinions of the American people regarding the need for a specific type of wall? Is it, rather, a reflection of popular opinion regarding the President of the United States of America Donald Trump? Once this has been determined, the next step is to examine causality and see if there is a traceable relationship between the defined polarization and the partial shutdown of the government, the willingness of Senate Majority Leader to turn over control of the Senate to the President in bringing votes for bills regarding the wall to a vote, etc..

And we're just looking at the first sentence of your post.

Regards.

The Democrats and the Republicans vote straight party lines with virtually no attempt to compromise. This is polarization and this is the cause of the shutdown. Neither has the power to force their view, but they still refuse to compromise. The country is polarized behind the parties.

[Torus34]

One Degree:

So far, so good. The primary thrust of the OP was the subverting of the separation of the three sections of the federal government. Specifics were given. Your response was, "'The reason behind it is a polarized country."

You should begin by justifying your statement and demonstrating causality.

Regards.