I want to be all like, omnomnom.
But then I'm all like, mmm, better not. Most of the FDA food inspectors have been sent home because of the government shutdown.
FDA spokesman Steven Immergut has made clear that they're trying to do the best for the public health with their skeletal staffs and limited resources, but that all routine food safety inspections will be suspended until the government is up and running again. Only facilities that "present an immediate threat to public health" will be inspected. About 367 inspections per week will be delayed.
The House passed a bill on Monday that would return funding for the FDA during the shutdown. But the Senate has dismissed this bill among the many other bills that are part of the Republicans' piecemeal strategy intended to mitigate the damage they've done to important government functions that are suffering from the shutdown. Californian House Rep Sam Farr argued against the bill, telling HuffPost that "[p]assing these bills would be like seeing a school bus on fire and agreeing only to rescue the good-looking kids. It's ridiculous. I want to put out the fire." Democrats like Farr believe in the need to reopen the government fully, not little by little, and raise the debt ceiling.
Has the shutdown has improved your knowledge and appreciation for what the government does for us? Or has it only made you more infuriated by the government? Which "non-essential" part of the government that isn't being funded during the shutdown do you think SHOULD be funded and deemed "essential"? Is the Republicans' piecemeal strategy a strong or vain attempt to fund the government while saving face? And do you agree/disagree with the Democrats' response?
8 comments:
I believe that the government shutdown has shown a majority of Americans what exactly the government does. We take way too many things for granted, like the FDA and food safety, but as you demonstrated here, without a government, we lose this luxury. The shutdown has opened my eyes to the vast scale of aid that the government actually does, whether it be "non-essential" or "essential" (which I think are totally bogus labels...) The government should be reinstated as a whole. The Democrats have no need to allow the piece by piece approach, so I think the House should stop with the individual bills, and look at the whole picture. Without that, neither side will give in, and we won't be able to enjoy sushi without thinking about the lack of regulations that now occurs.
I agree that the shutdown has made us more knowledgeable and appreciative of what the government does, although unfortunately, this may be the only favorable consequence of the shutdown thus far.
I feel that the Republican Party's prompting of the shutdown and its piecemeal strategy will ultimately prove in vain. As much as some oppose Obamacare, I think that most aren't so strongly opposed to it as to approve of a government shutdown that furloughs thousands of workers and undermines the government's efficiency; preventing the furtherance of Obamacare alone doesn't outdo or negate the harm already wrought through the shutdown.
I do think that the Democrats' response is reasonable, because voting in favor of the piecemeal bills passed by the House would essentially condone the Republicans' shutdown of the government and depict prompting a government shutdown as an effective way to push an agenda not necessarily backed by a majority in Congress.
One would hope that all government functions are relatively essential, or why would the government be providing those services in the first place? Yes, we can say that the government is too big, and we are spending too much, but that does not mean that the services themselves are necessarily bad (fear of sushi is not a good thing).
What is essential? I don't know. Food inspection seems pretty important. But there's other things that are nice too. I mean, one could also say "I miss the Smithsonian." What about national parks? The national institutes of health?
At least libraries are locally/state funded and are still open...
Perhaps we take the government too much for granted, but if an organization has been providing services in the past then it is natural to expect it to continue providing these services.
I guess we can go for a couple weeks without sushi... or maybe not. Sushi is delicious.
I totally agree with Brianne and Connor; deeming parts of our government as "essential" or "non-essential" was a certainly irritating to me. Those parts of the government were all formed for important purposes for the well-being and benefit of the American people. Most of those departments and programs that were considered "non-essential" I believe are very essential. FDA, CDC, and USDA all make sure that what we consume for 3 meals a day is safe to eat and will not cause harm to our health. The fact that the EPA has lost 93% of it's employees is perturbing (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/30/us-usa-fiscal-epa-idUSBRE98T12E20130930). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change just released it's report a few weeks ago warning us of the catastrophic effects of global warming if we were to continue our current level greenhouse gas emissions. I believe that these warnings would increase the need for the EPA to continue functioning properly even in the event of a government shutdown.
I see the point in the Connor and Elkana's views on how the Democrats' response is appropriate in that it doesn't encourage the Republicans to think that they can shutdown the government and clean up the mess slowly while still getting what they want. But that's assuming that the Republicans will learn from this experience. Do you think they will?
A few days ago, the US Antarctic research program was cancelled. The inability to continue collecting data has stalled if not completely invalidated some research efforts. Thus, while I agree that the shutdown has made us more aware of the services that we are no longer receiving, national parks, FDA, CDC, and EPA functions included, it's important to note that ongoing processes reliant on continuous operation have been severely disrupted. The NIH, for one, is currently (or would have been) distributing research grants. I think at least in the long term, some of the quieter effects of the shutdown, including the stalling of research efforts may have louder, more noticeable long term effects. That being said, I'm appalled at the state of things. Long-term analysis of the effects of the shutdown becomes less applicable to theory and more applicable to reality with each passing day.
I miss sushi too, Jackie. This shutdown has become such a wakeup call to several people. It definitely made me realize and appreciate the responsibilities that the government takes on. People are able to live without visiting the Statue of Liberty; but with many relying very heavily on these regulations, food stamps, and other really important services, life is becoming very difficult for several Americans.
I believe that the shutdown really has opened my eyes to everything that is run by the government. Realizing all these things doesn't necessarily make me appreciate the government more but I do see all of the negative effects of the shutdown beyond the employees going without pay. The FDA being suspended as a result of the shutdown is a serious concern for the safety of many Americans, but isn't the biggest issue by far.
The government shutdown has opened my eyes to the many things the government oversees, but it has not made me necessarily appreciate it more. Although the suspension of the FDA is a huge safety concern, there are myriad other concerns due to the shutdown including the compensation of government employees. I do appreciate the national parks system and many other government overseen programs but the necessary functions of the government should be first priority and need to be re-implemented.
Post a Comment