House Of Representatives Staff Analysis Bill #: Cs Hb 1097 Insurance Claims Sponsor: Fill & Download for Free

There are so many relevant factors to how we got where we are (skip to the conclusions at the bottom if you don’t want details):Trump publicly said to bring him a deal that included protection for the 700,000 people in DACA, that he’ll “take the heat,” and will be okay with whatever deal they work out.[1] Although he repeatedly contradicted himself in that televised meeting[2], he was very clear on this part.The Congress tried to do their part, they came up with a bipartisan deal.Trump invited over the two Senators who had taken up his challenge and successfully negotiated a bipartisan deal that would pass the Senate. This was when his infamous remarks about “shithole countries” were made. One of the important aspects of that meeting that might’ve been overlooked because of the vulgarity, was that Trump (or hardliners on his staff) also surprised the bipartisan Senators coming to finalize the deal when he invited anti-immigrant firebrands to effectively sabotage the meeting. He blindsided them. They thought they were coming to just “dot the i’s and cross the t’s,” so to speak, because they’d done exactly what Trump asked and had something with bipartisan support, but instead, Trump sided with the far right and wrecked the deal. He reversed himself.[3][4]Fellow Republican and frequent golf partner of the president, Senator Graham, says Trump did a complete 180 on what he’d said in the televised meeting. Instead, he was deferring to hardliners on his staff, particularly one named Stephen Miller, saying "The Stephen Miller approach to immigration has no viability. Tuesday, the president was in a good place. He was the president of all of us. He spoke compassionately about immigration, tough on security, wanted bipartisanship. Two days later, there was a major change."[5]After Trump blew it up, they didn’t know how to move forward. They had already found something they had agreed on, but they needed to know what he would support. The problem was, he wasn’t saying. He was either indecisive, or afraid to get involved (seemingly both), contrary to what he’d said before.As we got closer and closer to the deadline, it was still unclear what Trump’s position was. This was the major impediment to a deal. Not even Republicans knew what Trump’s position was. It was not just Democrats saying that, but even leaders of his own party. Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, "I'm looking for something that President Trump supports, and he's not yet indicated what measure he's willing to sign.” He continued, “As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels." That’s pretty damning proof that Trump was the problem.[6][7]Much time was wasted until, on the last day before the government was to shut down at midnight, Trump finally got back in the game and invited over the Democratic Leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, for a meeting with just him and their chiefs of staff. Schumer said he left the meeting thinking they were close to a deal, but then Trump reversed himself yet again (presumably after speaking with hardliners again).Schumer would later say that against the wishes of many in his party, he even put the wall on the table and agreed to the funding level Trump asked for in the meeting (even though Mexico was supposed to pay for it), but it wasn’t enough. In order to prevent a shutdown, Schumer was willing to give in on something his party was against and Trump really wanted, and all Trump was putting on the table was something they themselves said they favored anyway (discussed in later bullets). And not for nothing, but why do they want make Americans pay for the wall? Trump said a thousand times Mexico would pay for it, not the taxpayers.Trump “the dealmaker” isn’t making any deals. Much of the time he’s had no involvement, and then the two times he did get involved, it was to destroy the deals that were nearly done. The rest of the time he was either uninvolved, or had said so many contradictory things that he paralyzed all progress.For the House’s part, Speaker Paul Ryan made a shutdown much more likely when he decided which bill to put up for a vote. He not only ignored the Dems but paid no mind to what would pass the Senate and instead worked with the farthest right elements of the House Republican caucus, who are always much farther right than most in the Senate. Avoiding a shutdown was unfortunately not his priority.Key to understanding this is that Republicans follow what they call the Hastert Rule[8], which isn’t a rule but an unofficial party guideline where they won’t bring something to a vote unless it has a majority of Republicans supporting it. This means that they would rather ignore the positions of more than half the House (most Dems and some Repubs) and fail to pass something than succeed with something that has majority support overall. They feel it’s better to fail as a single party and blame the other side, than to work with the other side and succeed on a bipartisan bill that would have far better chances of passing the Senate and becoming law.It’s the same reason the comprehensive immigration bill that passed the Senate a few years ago died in the House. The Republican Speaker of the House was afraid to upset the far right of his conference (The extreme “Freedom Caucus”) and lose his job (which is what happened anyway) so rather than allow something to pass in a bipartisan fashion, they let it die. That’s how Paul Ryan got his current job and he probably doesn’t want to meet the same fate, so he tries to keep that fringe element happy.As I explained in an April 2017 answer about how the so-called Freedom Caucus is able to exert so much power over Republicans, it all comes back to that Hastert Rule: “When the possibility of Democratic votes are excluded, the caucus goes from a negligible 7-9% of a body that can afford to sacrifice almost 50% of votes and still pass a bill, to 13-16% of a party that can’t lose more than 10%—making them the deciding votes.” I know that’s a lot of numbers so it might be worth reading twice or checking out the full answer (footnoted). Basically, they’re a small part of the House, but when Dems and moderates are written off from the get-go, it empowers the extreme right to punch above their weight.[9]The Budget Director for Trump used to be one of those extreme members of the House Freedom Caucus, and still pushes Trump toward extremes, which is part of the reason why they don’t have a real budget and instead just keep doing short term extensions of the old one. “As a congressman in 2013, Mulvaney was among a faction on the hard right that bullied GOP leaders into a shutdown confrontation by insisting on lacing a must-pass spending bill with provisions designed to cripple President Barack Obama’s signature health care law.” He’s the last person who gets to point any fingers.[10]Repubs keep saying Dems support what’s in this bill — that’s not true. There are changes in law that undermine Obamacare, which Dems do not support. The bill also lacks funding for community health centers, disaster aid, or much of a response to the opioid epidemic[11]. Furthermore, this is also a short term Continuing Resolution that makes it difficult (and less efficient, aka less productive and more expensive) for government to do its job well. CR’s are bad for not just the military but every department of government since they are unable to plan. Can you take that important training class next month? Who knows. Should you buy your plane ticket for that important meeting next month? Who knows. Can you replace that thing you’re going to run out of soon? Who knows. Can you hire someone to replace the people who recently left? Who knows.Dems have gone along with Republicans on FOUR previous CR’s in the last several months. How many times do they have to go along before Republicans actually fund the government for the entire year?Republicans blame Democrats for not going along with them, but some Republicans voted against them, too. If they lack the full support of their own party, how can they blame Democrats, who were allowed zero input into the bill?In fact, some Democrats did vote for the bill. So, even with some Democratic support, Republicans still didn’t have enough support for their bill. Doesn’t that tell you they should’ve revised the bill?Republicans control everything, the House, the Senate, and the White House, and have for more than a year now, so why are they leaving everything for the last minute?If Republicans need Democratic support, why are they bringing bills to the floor that Dems said they don’t support? It’s because they wanted to gamble with the government shutdown and hope the Dems would just cave and let them have 100% of their way.If Republicans didn’t believe Dems when they said they wouldn’t support it or thought they could call their bluff, that they needed to see them follow through on it, why did they hold the vote at the last possible minute? Apparently, it was to back them into a corner by raising the stakes as high as possible, taking us to the brink of shutdown, and ultimately over it.If the party in almost complete control of government is willing to take chances like that so they can completely dominate the country 100% of the time, taking for granted the votes of those representing about half the country, how can they say it’s not their responsibility?If Republicans were truly open to honest negotiation and wanted to keep the government open, why didn’t they accept the Dems offer for a brief CR of a few days so they can finish up negotiations without affecting government operations? It’s because they weren’t negotiating in good faith.Dems didn’t blow up DACA, Donald Trump did that. He started a 6 month countdown clock back in September.[12] He and Republicans said don’t worry, we have plenty of time to fix it before 700,000 hardworking Dreamers—who personally did nothing wrong, grew up in America, became high school valedictorians, started businesses, served in the military, work as first responders, nurses, doctors, are hugely beneficial to the economy,[13]and who 87% of Americans want to stay in the country[14]—don’t worry they said, just keep going along with us, we’ll get to them. Well, month after month, nothing happened. 6 months turned to 5, to 4, to 3, to 2…and now we’re 5 weeks away. Dems have very little power in government right now, a minority across the board. There’s very little they can ever do to stop a major injustice like this before it happens…except right now.Republicans created the DACA emergency countdown and did nothing about it, despite saying they support a fix that will keep them here. Not only will this be an awful thing to do to 700,000 people and their families, friends, employers, customers, but kicking them out will be insanely costly.[15]We already educated and integrated this group, should we now send them away so some other country benefits from that? To countries they don’t even know? Should Dems just do nothing to protect those 700,000 people (and the economy!) and simply rubber stamp whatever the Republicans want and hope for the best? Is that what the people who elected them expect?Republicans in the House say even if the Senate comes to an agreement, they might vote against it. That is absolutely their prerogative, but if that’s how they feel, why is it any less acceptable for Dems to vote their conscience as well?[16]Republicans who say, look, we gave them CHIP[17], what do they have to complain about? They ask how can Dems vote against a bill that funds children’s healthcare? That is so unbelievably disingenuous. Republicans inexplicably allowed that program to expire[18] months ago. States and families have been struggling to keep it together. This has been a bipartisan program for years, and a huge success both parties were proud of. The program is so effective that funding it actually saves the government billions, so it can’t be the cost or deficit.[19] Why was it allowed to expire? Why was it put on the back burner month after month as Dems begged Republicans to simply put it up for a vote. It would’ve passed with near unanimous support. Why is a widely supported, highly successful, cheaper than free, bipartisan bill for children’s healthcare suddenly something Republicans want to use as a bargaining chip?Republicans, with the exception of some of the hardliners, a minority in both chambers, say they support both DACA and CHIP. So, Democrats weren’t exactly asking for something crazy, they just wanted something that’s urgently needed (one expired, the other is about to expire and have irreversible effects on millions of families), which Republicans said they support anyway. It’s not at all like what Republicans shut down the government for in 2013—trying to get Obama and the Dems to undo their signature achievement (the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare), a ridiculous ask to hold out for.When they failed to keep the government open, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell’s next offer was pretty weak tea. Former Republican Congressman David Jolly summarized it this way, "So if you'll agree to keep the govt open until Feb 8, I promise to try and fail to negotiate an immigration deal. When we fail, I promise to bring up a bill that can't pass the House and the President won't sign."[20]DACA shouldn’t be a sticking point for Trump, he called it “a bill of love.”[21] Although he previously lambasted Jeb Bush for saying something similar, he said this more recently. How is anyone to know where Trump stands from one day to the next?Republicans and Trump are saying they won’t negotiate over DACA while the government is shut down. Dems would’ve gladly given them a short extension to discuss it but Repubs weren’t open to it. Essentially, the response was “trust us.” Some commentators liken that to “I will gladly pay you on Tuesday for a hamburger on Monday,” and of course, the classic “Charlie Brown and Lucy with the football” story, where Lucy continually plays Charlie Brown for a fool, promising this time will be different, and still pulling it away again and again. The Republicans have shown they can’t be trusted time and again, the Dems are tired of being played for fools, and more importantly, they knew this was their last chance to save the Dreamers before it was too late.Which party generally thinks government does important work and which party routinely denigrates it?Guess which party/president once said, Republicans “should not be afraid of a government shutdown.” That was Donald Trump, not Democrats.[22]Guess which party/president once said, “Well, if you say who gets fired it always has to be the top…problems start from the top and they have to get solved from the top and the president’s the leader. And he’s got to get everybody in a room and he’s got to lead.”[23]Does he no longer believe that?Guess which party/president not long ago said, as president, we need a “good shutdown.” That was Donald Trump, not Democrats.[24]Guess which party escalated use and abuse of the 60 vote filibuster, beyond all precedent, making its use the new normal? That was Mitch McConnell, not Democrats.See how many times McConnell filibustered in just Obama’s first 5 years? It was more than twice Bush’s entire 8 years[25]:Guess which party shut down the government the last three times before this, against Obama and Clinton?[26] It wasn’t the Democrats.Shortly after another legislative failure, House Speaker Paul Ryan said, "Moving from an opposition party to a governing party comes with growing pains."[27][28]This was his explanation for why Republicans are bad at governing. Clearly, they’re still having trouble, despite being in charge of everything. They have their biggest majorities since the 1920s![29] If they can’t make government work when they have that kind of power, they’re pretty hopeless.Usually, when one party controls the entire government, they can figure out how to get most of what they want and still keep the government open. Why are Republicans so incompetent at governing? We’ve seen so many examples of this over the past year, and this is just the latest. This is the first real government shutdown under one-party government, ever“The shutdown rests at the feet of the GOP and it appears a majority of Americans agree,” according to the former head of the Republican National Committee. We’re not talking about someone from decades ago when they were a different, more rational party, but the guy who led them through their 2010 wave election against Obama.[30]When the same party controls every aspect of the federal government, who is to blame when vital programs are allowed to expire? Who is to blame when programs go unaddressed for months past their expiration? Where is their sense of urgency?When the same party controls every aspect of the federal government, who is to blame when repeatedly they only fund the government a tiny bit at a time, on Continuing Resolutions, risking shutdowns and making government work less efficiently?Where is the dealmaker president? During the shutdown, the White House released in-house photos (not taken by the press) of him posing with a phone and an empty desk, but who was he supposed to be talking to? None of the Democrats heard from him during the shutdown.For someone who considers himself the best there is at making deals, who says he can get deals done where others can’t, where was he? He’s supposed to be so amazing, so tremendous (according to himself). We could’ve really used some of that amazing tremendousness. As we’ve seen again and again, the self-proclaimed dealmaker seems to be doing the opposite, standing in the way of the deal, making the deals harder to get done. One commentator (a Democrat) had a good quote about Trump, “Donald Trump is like the arsonist who hopes you come home and blame the neighbors for the blaze.”[31] As you can see from his repeated sabotage of negotiations, this really holds true.***CONCLUSIONS***What it comes down to is that the shutdown could’ve been avoided if either side caved, so neither side looks great here.But I think there’s more than enough evidence that:Democrats made all sorts of good faith efforts to avoid itRepublicans backed Democrats into a corner and gave them no other option apart from utter subservienceRepublicans set this in motion many different ways and could’ve easily avoided it many different ways.Seriously, they had so many opportunities to avoid this outcome, at least 7, and that’s without even doing anything they don’t want to do.**7 Missed Opportunities for Republicans to Avoid the Shutdown**Republicans could have:Moved forward with the first bipartisan deal (that Trump blew up)Moved forward with the second bipartisan deal (that Trump also blew up)Made their negotiating positions clear and stuck to it (Trump kept everyone wondering what he was for)Passed a House bill that had more support in the Senate, instead of freezing out both Democrats and moderate Republicans, and caving to hardline anti-immigrant Republicans in the House (yes, anti-immigrant- look at things Rep. Steve King has said)[32]Passed CHIP and DACA any time in the last 6 months (which has broad support in both chambers of Congress)Not waited until the last possible minute to votePassed a several day extension to buy more time to talk without kicking the can weeks or months down the road (Dems would’ve accepted that to avoid a shutdown)Had Republicans done any of the above, the shutdown would’ve been avoided.So, while I don’t completely excuse the Democrats, they did everything they could to avoid it, they went along on 4 previous continuing resolutions for promises that went unfulfilled, they made their intentions clear, they acted reasonably and made earnest, diligent, bipartisan efforts to avoid this outcome, but the Republican held most of the cards and made such poor decisions that they ended up shutting down a government while they controlled the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives.As you see above, Republicans had 7—SEVEN!—different ways to avert this shutdown. If they had genuinely wanted to avoid it, they could have. If they truly wanted to keep the government open, they failed miserably.Edit: I thought of an 8th way Republicans could've avoided this shutdown. Trump could've left DACA in place in the first place, instead of triggering the countdown necessitating action.Footnotes[1] Trump says he'll sign DACA deal, pursue comprehensive immigration reform[2] Trump contradicts self repeatedly in immigration meeting[3] How a day that started with a bipartisan immigration deal ended with a "shithole"[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-tense-profane-white-house-meeting-on-immigration/2018/01/15/13e79fa4-fa1e-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html?utm_term=.7399f7ff28d8[5] GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rips into White House for Trump's change on immigration deal[6] Analysis | Mitch McConnell’s clear, passive-aggressive dig at Trump[7] McConnell says Senate will consider immigration deal "as soon as we figure out" what Trump supports[8] Hastert Rule - Wikipedia[9] Ross Cohen's answer to How did the Freedom Caucus rise to power?[10] Mulvaney has been at center of last 2 government shutdowns[11] Senate Dems push for health center funding in spending bill[12] With Shot at Dreamers, Trump Launches G.O.P. Civil War[13] End of DACA Spells Trouble for Economy[14] Poll: Nearly 9 in 10 want DACA recipients to stay in US[15] https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/05/daca-deportations-could-cost-us-economy-more-than-400-billion.htmlhttps://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/05/daca-deportations-could-cost-us-economy-more-than-400-billion.html[16] House GOP warns: We’re no rubber stamp for Senate DACA fix[17] Children's Health Insurance Program - Wikipedia[18] Congress let CHIP’s funding expire 110 days ago, and it’s a national disgrace[19] The price of extending CHIP is now so low it saves the government money[20] David Jolly : ""So if you'll agree to keep the govt o…" - Twitter[21] Trump calls for DACA fix, still wants wall in bipartisan immigration talk[22] Before Trump didn't want a government shutdown, he praised it[23] Trump's comments blaming Obama for 2013 government shutdown resurface[24] Trump: US ‘needs a good shutdown’[25] Three charts explain why Democrats went nuclear on the filibuster[26] All 18 previous government shutdowns, explained[27] House Pulls GOP Health-Care Bill[28] https://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2017-03-31/the-failed-obamacare-repeal-and-paul-ryans-endless-opposition[29] Republicans have largest majority since 1928[30] Whose Fault Is the Shutdown?[31] Whose Fault Is the Shutdown?[32] A history of Steve King's anti-immigrant, white nationalist rhetoric

Yes, if you look at recent history, that’s the inescapable conclusion.Let’s review:Dec 2018: An agreement made to pass a stopgap funding bill through the Republican House and Senate, with the blessing of the Republican president who would sign it, was interrupted when said president (Trump) had a sudden change of heart mid-plan, and signaled to his allies/toadies running the House that he changed his mind, leading to a shutdown.The change was a result of him caving to pressure not to sign any bill that funds the government unless it also met one of their political demands (a $5.7 billion down payment on a wall of indeterminate cost). Literally the only people lobbying him for this action came from the far right, including far right media personalities like Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, Rush Limbaugh, and two prominent members of the hard right House “Freedom Caucus.” They were the only cheerleaders for shutdown and Trump did their bidding.[1][1][1][1][2][2][2][2][3][3][3][3][4][4][4][4][5][5][5][5][6][6][6][6][7][7][7][7][8][8][8][8][9][9][9][9][10][10][10][10][11][11][11][11]Conclusion: Yes, far right conservatives drove the shutdown.Jan/Feb 2018: Under pressure from the far right, Trump reneged on multiple agreements they made that would have kept the government open. House Republicans under Paul Ryan then chose to vote only for the funding bill that the far right “Freedom Caucus” supported (and far right Rep. Steve King), which lacked support in the Senate, instead of the bill that could pass both the House and Senate, with bipartisan support, but which lacked support from the far right “Freedom Caucus.”Furthermore, Trump’s budget director (now also his Chief of Staff), Mick Mulvaney, was previously one of the prominent members of the far right “Freedom Caucus” that helped shut down the government in 2013.Additionally, when Trump wrecked bipartisan deals he had asked Republican senators to make with Democrats, he did so at the urging of another of the far right hardliners on his staff, Stephen Miller (who continues to advise Trump and lobby publicly for shutdown brinksmanship to achieve his agenda, so this could also apply to the more recent shutdown). Miller was also the brains behind the initial version of the travel ban from the beginning of the presidency, and arguments to greatly curtail legal immigration as well.Yet another far right immigration hardliner urging Trump not to accept bipartisan compromise agreements was Steve Bannon, a white nationalist who served as Trump’s Chief Strategist and campaign manager.For every potential solution to avoid the shutdowns, the far right conservatives sabotaged it. The far right conservatives opposed all forms of compromise and urged a scorched Earth position where only complete capitulation would avoid shutdown.[12][12][12][12][13][13][13][13][14][14][14][14][15][15][15][15][16][16][16][16][17][17][17][17][18][18][18][18][19][19][19][19][20][20][20][20][21][21][21][21][22][22][22][22][23][23][23][23][24][24][24][24][25][25][25][25][26][26][26][26][27][27][27][27][28][28][28][28][29][29][29][29][30][30][30][30]Conclusion: Yes, far right conservatives drove these shutdowns.For an abbreviated overview of how we got the Jan/Feb ‘18 shutdowns, read this answer. For a comprehensive explanation, see: What are your insights into the January 2018 U.S. government shutdown?Oct 2013: The Republican House, being driven by its right flank, with leading encouragement from far right conservative Sen. Ted Cruz (truly the architect of the shutdown[31][31][31][31][32][32][32][32][33][33][33][33][34][34][34][34][35][35][35][35][36][36][36][36][37][37][37][37][38][38][38][38][39][39][39][39][40][40][40][40][41][41][41][41][42][42][42][42][43][43][43][43]) and conservative advocacy group, Heritage Action[44][44][44][44], demanded that the Democratic Senate and White House defund their signature achievement (the Affordable Care Act), in order to fund the rest of the government. With no willingness to compromise, no agreement was reached and the government shut down.Conclusion: Yes, far right conservatives drove the shutdown.We’ve now covered all the most recent shutdowns. Each of these four shutdowns was driven by far right conservatives. Each of these shutdowns occurred in the last five years, and these were the only shutdowns to occur in the past 20+ years.If we were to continue going back, extending our review to the past 25 years, we’d see two additional government shutdowns and continue to find far right conservatives playing a major role in driving them, especially if you consider Newt Gingrich and far right conservatives of talk radio to fit the description.To keep this answer a manageable length, I kept the review of each one short, but I think we’ve spotted the trend. Just as this answer quantitatively showed the overwhelming pattern of shutdowns occurring with Republicans in power (a broad overview), and other answers used more qualitative explanation of individual shutdowns (a more granular view), the one above is a blend of the broad and the granular, albeit a somewhat concise one, with less emphasis on the party and more on their place in the political spectrum.If we don’t realize we’re being constantly driven to crisis situations by the same extreme, vocal minority, we’ll continue to repeat history and allow them to wreak havoc on our politics. The first step is awareness of the problem.Footnotes[1] Meet the real power broker behind Trump's shutdown[1] Meet the real power broker behind Trump's shutdown[1] Meet the real power broker behind Trump's shutdown[1] Meet the real power broker behind Trump's shutdown[2] Fox News demanded a government shutdown — and got one[2] Fox News demanded a government shutdown — and got one[2] Fox News demanded a government shutdown — and got one[2] Fox News demanded a government shutdown — and got one[3] Trump bows to conservative backlash over border wall funding[3] Trump bows to conservative backlash over border wall funding[3] Trump bows to conservative backlash over border wall funding[3] Trump bows to conservative backlash over border wall funding[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/22/this-is-tyranny-talk-radio-hosts-right-limbaugh-coulter-blamed-trumps-shutdown/[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/22/this-is-tyranny-talk-radio-hosts-right-limbaugh-coulter-blamed-trumps-shutdown/[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/22/this-is-tyranny-talk-radio-hosts-right-limbaugh-coulter-blamed-trumps-shutdown/[4] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/22/this-is-tyranny-talk-radio-hosts-right-limbaugh-coulter-blamed-trumps-shutdown/[5] Trump’s Allies in Conservative Media Put the President ‘on the Griddle’[5] Trump’s Allies in Conservative Media Put the President ‘on the Griddle’[5] Trump’s Allies in Conservative Media Put the President ‘on the Griddle’[5] Trump’s Allies in Conservative Media Put the President ‘on the Griddle’[6] http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-12-19.html#read_more[6] http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-12-19.html#read_more[6] http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-12-19.html#read_more[6] http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2018-12-19.html#read_more[7] Trump "fell in line behind Sean Hannity" on border wall stance, retiring Republican representative says[7] Trump "fell in line behind Sean Hannity" on border wall stance, retiring Republican representative says[7] Trump "fell in line behind Sean Hannity" on border wall stance, retiring Republican representative says[7] Trump "fell in line behind Sean Hannity" on border wall stance, retiring Republican representative says[8] What Does Trump Really Care About? What Ann Coulter Thinks[8] What Does Trump Really Care About? What Ann Coulter Thinks[8] What Does Trump Really Care About? What Ann Coulter Thinks[8] What Does Trump Really Care About? What Ann Coulter Thinks[9] Trump's base is pushing him to the edge of a government shutdown over the border wall[9] Trump's base is pushing him to the edge of a government shutdown over the border wall[9] Trump's base is pushing him to the edge of a government shutdown over the border wall[9] Trump's base is pushing him to the edge of a government shutdown over the border wall[10] Talk radio and TV pundits goaded Trump into shutdown [Editorial][10] Talk radio and TV pundits goaded Trump into shutdown [Editorial][10] Talk radio and TV pundits goaded Trump into shutdown [Editorial][10] Talk radio and TV pundits goaded Trump into shutdown [Editorial][11] Conservatives voice frustration after Trump signals 'gutless' retreat on border wall[11] Conservatives voice frustration after Trump signals 'gutless' retreat on border wall[11] Conservatives voice frustration after Trump signals 'gutless' retreat on border wall[11] Conservatives voice frustration after Trump signals 'gutless' retreat on border wall[12] Graham blames Trump’s staff for scuttling deal[12] Graham blames Trump’s staff for scuttling deal[12] Graham blames Trump’s staff for scuttling deal[12] Graham blames Trump’s staff for scuttling deal[13] Mulvaney has been at center of last 2 government shutdowns[13] Mulvaney has been at center of last 2 government shutdowns[13] Mulvaney has been at center of last 2 government shutdowns[13] Mulvaney has been at center of last 2 government shutdowns[14] GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rips into White House for Trump's change on immigration deal[14] GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rips into White House for Trump's change on immigration deal[14] GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rips into White House for Trump's change on immigration deal[14] GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham rips into White House for Trump's change on immigration deal[15] Stephen Miller: Trump "absolutely" willing to shut down government over border wall[15] Stephen Miller: Trump "absolutely" willing to shut down government over border wall[15] Stephen Miller: Trump "absolutely" willing to shut down government over border wall[15] Stephen Miller: Trump "absolutely" willing to shut down government over border wall[16] Trump will do "whatever is necessary" for border wall, including government shutdown, Stephen Miller says[16] Trump will do "whatever is necessary" for border wall, including government shutdown, Stephen Miller says[16] Trump will do "whatever is necessary" for border wall, including government shutdown, Stephen Miller says[16] Trump will do "whatever is necessary" for border wall, including government shutdown, Stephen Miller says[17] Stephen Miller says Trump is "absolutely" willing to shut down the government over border wall funding[17] Stephen Miller says Trump is "absolutely" willing to shut down the government over border wall funding[17] Stephen Miller says Trump is "absolutely" willing to shut down the government over border wall funding[17] Stephen Miller says Trump is "absolutely" willing to shut down the government over border wall funding[18] Stephen Miller is a product of "chain migration," his uncle says[18] Stephen Miller is a product of "chain migration," his uncle says[18] Stephen Miller is a product of "chain migration," his uncle says[18] Stephen Miller is a product of "chain migration," his uncle says[19] Steve Bannon in 2016: legal immigration is the real "problem"[19] Steve Bannon in 2016: legal immigration is the real "problem"[19] Steve Bannon in 2016: legal immigration is the real "problem"[19] Steve Bannon in 2016: legal immigration is the real "problem"[20] A guide to Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who spent years mainstreaming white nationalism[20] A guide to Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who spent years mainstreaming white nationalism[20] A guide to Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who spent years mainstreaming white nationalism[20] A guide to Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who spent years mainstreaming white nationalism[21] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-explained-his-worldview-well-before-it-became-official-us-policy/2017/01/31/2f4102ac-e7ca-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?postshare=1421485961396127&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.b18069017cef[21] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-explained-his-worldview-well-before-it-became-official-us-policy/2017/01/31/2f4102ac-e7ca-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?postshare=1421485961396127&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.b18069017cef[21] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-explained-his-worldview-well-before-it-became-official-us-policy/2017/01/31/2f4102ac-e7ca-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?postshare=1421485961396127&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.b18069017cef[21] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-explained-his-worldview-well-before-it-became-official-us-policy/2017/01/31/2f4102ac-e7ca-11e6-80c2-30e57e57e05d_story.html?postshare=1421485961396127&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.b18069017cef[22] How Donald Trump's campaign chief created an online haven for white nationalists[22] How Donald Trump's campaign chief created an online haven for white nationalists[22] How Donald Trump's campaign chief created an online haven for white nationalists[22] How Donald Trump's campaign chief created an online haven for white nationalists[23] Steve Bannon: appointment of 'white nationalist' must be reversed, critics declare[23] Steve Bannon: appointment of 'white nationalist' must be reversed, critics declare[23] Steve Bannon: appointment of 'white nationalist' must be reversed, critics declare[23] Steve Bannon: appointment of 'white nationalist' must be reversed, critics declare[24] White nationalists see advocate in Steve Bannon who will hold Trump to his campaign promises [24] White nationalists see advocate in Steve Bannon who will hold Trump to his campaign promises [24] White nationalists see advocate in Steve Bannon who will hold Trump to his campaign promises [24] White nationalists see advocate in Steve Bannon who will hold Trump to his campaign promises [25] A White Nationalist Is The New White House Chief Strategist[25] A White Nationalist Is The New White House Chief Strategist[25] A White Nationalist Is The New White House Chief Strategist[25] A White Nationalist Is The New White House Chief Strategist[26] Here's why it's fair—and necessary—to call Trump's chief strategist a white nationalist champion[26] Here's why it's fair—and necessary—to call Trump's chief strategist a white nationalist champion[26] Here's why it's fair—and necessary—to call Trump's chief strategist a white nationalist champion[26] Here's why it's fair—and necessary—to call Trump's chief strategist a white nationalist champion[27] Trump Gives Steve Bannon, Champion of White Nationalism, Key National Security Seat[27] Trump Gives Steve Bannon, Champion of White Nationalism, Key National Security Seat[27] Trump Gives Steve Bannon, Champion of White Nationalism, Key National Security Seat[27] Trump Gives Steve Bannon, Champion of White Nationalism, Key National Security Seat[28] Analysis: Breitbart's Steve Bannon leads the 'alt right' to the White House[28] Analysis: Breitbart's Steve Bannon leads the 'alt right' to the White House[28] Analysis: Breitbart's Steve Bannon leads the 'alt right' to the White House[28] Analysis: Breitbart's Steve Bannon leads the 'alt right' to the White House[29] Steve Bannon ‘connects network of white nationalists’ at the White House[29] Steve Bannon ‘connects network of white nationalists’ at the White House[29] Steve Bannon ‘connects network of white nationalists’ at the White House[29] Steve Bannon ‘connects network of white nationalists’ at the White House[30] Quotes from Steve Bannon, Trump's new White House chief strategist[30] Quotes from Steve Bannon, Trump's new White House chief strategist[30] Quotes from Steve Bannon, Trump's new White House chief strategist[30] Quotes from Steve Bannon, Trump's new White House chief strategist[31] Ted Cruz Challenges Republicans To Do the (Pretty Much) Impossible | TIME.com[31] Ted Cruz Challenges Republicans To Do the (Pretty Much) Impossible | TIME.com[31] Ted Cruz Challenges Republicans To Do the (Pretty Much) Impossible | TIME.com[31] Ted Cruz Challenges Republicans To Do the (Pretty Much) Impossible | TIME.com[32] Some colleagues angry with Cruz[32] Some colleagues angry with Cruz[32] Some colleagues angry with Cruz[32] Some colleagues angry with Cruz[33] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-cruzs-plan-to-defund-obamacare-failed--and-what-it-achieved/2016/02/16/4e2ce116-c6cb-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html?utm_term=.85782a4374ed[33] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-cruzs-plan-to-defund-obamacare-failed--and-what-it-achieved/2016/02/16/4e2ce116-c6cb-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html?utm_term=.85782a4374ed[33] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-cruzs-plan-to-defund-obamacare-failed--and-what-it-achieved/2016/02/16/4e2ce116-c6cb-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html?utm_term=.85782a4374ed[33] https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-cruzs-plan-to-defund-obamacare-failed--and-what-it-achieved/2016/02/16/4e2ce116-c6cb-11e5-8965-0607e0e265ce_story.html?utm_term=.85782a4374ed[34] The episode that explains Ted Cruz's rise and fall[34] The episode that explains Ted Cruz's rise and fall[34] The episode that explains Ted Cruz's rise and fall[34] The episode that explains Ted Cruz's rise and fall[35] Ted Cruz Runs Against His Own Government Shutdown[35] Ted Cruz Runs Against His Own Government Shutdown[35] Ted Cruz Runs Against His Own Government Shutdown[35] Ted Cruz Runs Against His Own Government Shutdown[36] Susan Collins throws shutdown shade at Ted Cruz[36] Susan Collins throws shutdown shade at Ted Cruz[36] Susan Collins throws shutdown shade at Ted Cruz[36] Susan Collins throws shutdown shade at Ted Cruz[37] Ted Cruz says he's opposed shutdowns, but he hasn't always[37] Ted Cruz says he's opposed shutdowns, but he hasn't always[37] Ted Cruz says he's opposed shutdowns, but he hasn't always[37] Ted Cruz says he's opposed shutdowns, but he hasn't always[38] Ted Cruz doesn't talk about the government shutdown - CNNPolitics[38] Ted Cruz doesn't talk about the government shutdown - CNNPolitics[38] Ted Cruz doesn't talk about the government shutdown - CNNPolitics[38] Ted Cruz doesn't talk about the government shutdown - CNNPolitics[39] Ted Cruz's shutdown amnesia: Who's to blame for the 2013 shutdown? Everyone but Ted Cruz![39] Ted Cruz's shutdown amnesia: Who's to blame for the 2013 shutdown? Everyone but Ted Cruz![39] Ted Cruz's shutdown amnesia: Who's to blame for the 2013 shutdown? Everyone but Ted Cruz![39] Ted Cruz's shutdown amnesia: Who's to blame for the 2013 shutdown? Everyone but Ted Cruz![40] Ted Cruz Played Politics With the Shutdown and Lost. Now He’s Feigning Innocence.[40] Ted Cruz Played Politics With the Shutdown and Lost. Now He’s Feigning Innocence.[40] Ted Cruz Played Politics With the Shutdown and Lost. Now He’s Feigning Innocence.[40] Ted Cruz Played Politics With the Shutdown and Lost. Now He’s Feigning Innocence.[41] Shutdown star Ted Cruz wants to keep the lights on this time[41] Shutdown star Ted Cruz wants to keep the lights on this time[41] Shutdown star Ted Cruz wants to keep the lights on this time[41] Shutdown star Ted Cruz wants to keep the lights on this time[42] Eyes roll as Ted Cruz denies role in 2013 government shutdown; 'Speechless' says one senator[42] Eyes roll as Ted Cruz denies role in 2013 government shutdown; 'Speechless' says one senator[42] Eyes roll as Ted Cruz denies role in 2013 government shutdown; 'Speechless' says one senator[42] Eyes roll as Ted Cruz denies role in 2013 government shutdown; 'Speechless' says one senator[43] Call The Government Shutdown The 'Ted Cruz Crisis'[43] Call The Government Shutdown The 'Ted Cruz Crisis'[43] Call The Government Shutdown The 'Ted Cruz Crisis'[43] Call The Government Shutdown The 'Ted Cruz Crisis'[44] Heritage Action's Shutdown Strategy[44] Heritage Action's Shutdown Strategy[44] Heritage Action's Shutdown Strategy[44] Heritage Action's Shutdown Strategy

No, nor can there be, not really, for both a legal reason and a technical reason.The legal reason is that the manner in which a bill will update the US Code depends on how that bill, once adopted, will be interpreted by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, a staff office of the House of Representatives. Until the OLRC has reviewed the bill and determined how it changes the US Code, nobody can know for sure what the effects that bill will have on the US Code.Note also that the US Code, as published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel, is not actually the official law of the United States, at least not until and unless a particular section of code as published by OLRC is “adopted into positive law” by Congress. The official text of all adopted laws is found in the Statutes at Large. In the extremely rare case of a disagreement between the Statutes at Large and the US Code, the Statutes at Large take precedence.The technical reason is that at the present time, at least, the state of the art in the ability of a computer to understand English is not nearly good enough for a computer to perform the function that the lawyers of the OLRC currently perform. Congress almost never adopts bills that say “Strike the third through fifth paragraphs of Law X and replace them with…”. Instead, Congress quite often merely declares what the new rule is to be and leaves it to OLRC to figure out what has been superseded and update the code appropriately. OLRC is very good at this, but that’s because they have a staff of highly trained attorneys. Computers, not so much.For example, let’s take Public Law 117–1, the first bill passed by Congress in the current session. It’s a short one, so our analysis should be fairly easy, right? Here’s the text:An ActTo provide for an exception to a limitation against appointment ofpersons as Secretary of Defense within seven years of relief from activeduty as a regular commissioned officer of the Armed Forces. <<NOTE: Jan.22, 2021 - [H.R. 335]>>Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of theUnited States of America in Congress assembled,SECTION 1. <<NOTE: 10 USC 113 note.>> EXCEPTION TO LIMITATIONAGAINST APPOINTMENT OF PERSONS ASSECRETARY OF DEFENSE WITHIN SEVENYEARS OF RELIEF FROM ACTIVE DUTY ASREGULAR COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF THEARMED FORCES.(a) In General.--Notwithstanding the second sentence of section113(a) of title 10, United States Code, the first person appointed, byand with the advice and consent of the Senate, as Secretary of Defensein an appointment made on or after January 20, 2021, may be a person whois, on the date of appointment, within seven years after relief, but notwithin four years after relief, from active duty as a commissionedofficer of a regular component of the Armed Forces.(b) <<NOTE: Applicability.>> Limited Exception.--This sectionapplies only to the first person nominated after 12 p.m. (EasternStandard Time) on January 20, 2021, and appointed as Secretary ofDefense as described in subsection (a), and to no other person.Approved January 22, 2021.Can you figure out what section, or sections, of the US Code are affected by this adopted law? I can make a fair guess at it, but I both went to law school and have more than a passing interest in this fairly obscure aspect of the American lawmaking process. Most people cannot. And I really really doubt anybody has written a computer program, or is anywhere close to writing one, that can parse the text above and determine from it with any degree of certainty what decision OLRC will make when it reviews this law.It is my prediction, based on my own training, knowledge, and experience, that OLRC will determine that this law does not change the “general and permanent law of the United States” and will thus make no changes to the US Code as a result of this statute. OLRC will almost certainly add a note to 10 U.S. Code § 113 when it reviews this law, but notes are not formally part of the Code, although they are often extremely useful. In any case, this hasn’t happened yet: OLRC is still working its way through two of last session’s bills and probably won’t get to P. L. 117–1 for some time now. As of now, they’ve updated through P. L. 116-344 (01/13/2021, the last law from the last Congress), except for P. Ls. 116-260 (the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, 2124 pages) and 116-283 (the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, 1480 pages). These two laws, due to their substantial size and scope, will take them quite a while, I suspect, and they’ll likely hold off on doing anything from the 117th Congress until those two are done.And that’s an easy case. Now do the same thing for Public Law 117–2, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. All 242 pages of it.