As the clock ticks toward a government shutdown, who's driving the debate?

So far, Republicans and Democrats have failed to avert a partial government shutdown tied to the future of Obamacare. Both sides flooded the Sunday news shows with blame-naming and dire warnings.

Chris Usher/CBS News/AP
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D) of Maryland, on 'Face the Nation' Sunday. The US braced for a partial government shutdown Tuesday after the White House and congressional Democrats declared they would reject a bill approved by the Republican-led House to delay implementing President Obama's health-care reform law.

Sunday TV news shows are a playground for pundits and politicians, equally driven like high school debaters to exhibit forceful rhetorical skills and advance their cause. One part partisan positioning, two parts ego.

The exchange between David Gregory of NBC’s “Meet the Press” and Sen. Ted Cruz this week was classic. Twenty or so uninterrupted minutes of sharp-edged back-and-forth between the veteran journalist and the freshman Texas lawmaker who has rankled many fellow Republicans as well as Democrats with his aggressive opposition to the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.

Both were prepared and did well, but Senator Cruz probably won on points. (As an undergraduate at Princeton University, he won the top speaker award at both the 1992 US National Debating Championship and the 1992 North American Debating Championship. At Harvard Law School, he was a semi-finalist at the 1995 World Universities Debating Championship.)

With barely more than 24 hours before a possible shutdown of government funding that’s focused on the future (if any) of Obamacare, that was the subject across the broadcast spectrum Sunday.

As Associated Press political writer Alan Fram pointed out, “Lawmakers spoke past one another on the Sunday talk shows, often rehashing the turbulent fights about the health overhaul that the Supreme Court has upheld, as the nation edged toward the first government shutdown in 17 years.”

Most of those lawmakers talking Sunday emphasized who’s to blame.

“We would love for [President Obama] to sit down and say, ‘OK, there are some problems with Obamacare,’” Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R) of Tennessee said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “We’ve been met with this attitude of no negotiation. Don’t want to sit down. Don’t want to talk about this. It’s my way or the highway.”

“If we have a shutdown, it will be because [Senate majority leader] Harry Reid holds that absolutist position and essentially holds the American people hostage,” Cruz said on “Meet the Press.” “He says, ‘I’m not willing to compromise, I’m not willing to even talk.’ His position is 100 percent of Obamacare must be funded in all instances. Other than that, he’s going to shut the government down.”

Rep. Raul Labrador (R) of Idaho sees a purely political reason for this.

“Let’s be really honest about this. The other side would like to see Republicans in trouble in 2014,” Representatiove Labrador said on “Meet the Press.”

“I think everybody agrees that this is a loser for [the GOP] if the government shuts down,” he said. “That’s why I think the president and the Democrats want to shut down the government.”

Democrats have a different view, of course.

"Drive the country to the cliff and then say give us what we want," is how Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D) of Maryland characterized the Republican position on "Face the Nation.”

“These people have come unhinged,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D) of Florida, who chairs the Democratic National Committee, said on CNN's "State of the Union."

She was speaking of the GOP effort to link government funding to delaying and changing the Affordable Care Act. House Republican leaders had also linked removing the threat of a government shutdown to easing business regulations, tax reforms, and approval of the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

"That's totally and wholly irresponsible," Representative Wasserman Schultz said.

Senate majority whip Dick Durbin (D) of Illinois said he might consider one of the Republican demands – repealing the tax on medical devices – "but not with a gun to my head. Not with the prospect of shutting down the government."

“As I have said repeatedly, the Senate will reject any Republican attempt to force changes to the Affordable Care Act through a mandatory government funding bill,” Senator Reid (D) of Nevada said in a statement Sunday. “After weeks of futile political games from Republicans, we are still at square one.”

Does “square one” mean there’s no wiggle room for avoiding a shutdown of many government agencies and services, including the furlough of hundreds of thousands of civilian workers?

House majority whip Kevin McCarthy (R) of California hints that might – just might – be possible.

“I think the House will get back together, in enough time, send another provision not to shut the government down but to fund it, and it will have a few other options in there for the Senate to look at,” Representative McCarthy said on “Fox News Sunday.”

“There are a lot of items that are on the table,” he said without elaborating.

The drama is scheduled to continue Monday when the Senate reconvenes.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.