How so we avoid another shutdown? Well, for starters, be pro-active, stay on the offense, elect Progressives (starting at the local level on up), get off your collective hineys and vote in every single election and help others to do the same, give tea partiers and other irrational conservatives the boot, demand that Democrats stay strong and unified, challenge the media when they misinform voters, and make it even more obvious to America which Republicans are responsible (and irresponsible) for the hundreds of thousands of jobs and billions and billions of dollars lost because of their self-interests and consuming concerns about re-election.
Other than all that, in today's Los Angeles Times, David Gamage and David Louk presented another idea.
David Gamage is an assistant professor at UC Berkeley School of Law. David Louk is a law student at Yale Law School and a doctoral student in the Jurisprudence & Social Policy Program at UC Berkeley School of Law. Their L.A. Times op-ed is based on their forthcoming research paper.
Here are the bare bones of their idea. Please read the entire op-ed for more details:
It doesn't have to be that way. State and federal legislators should follow the lead of Wisconsin and Rhode Island and enact provisions for automatic continuing appropriations. Under such rules, if lawmakers fail to negotiate a new budget on time, the previous year's budget automatically carries over until a new spending plan is passed. This gives legislators the opportunity to negotiate without the threat of a looming and costly shutdown. [...]
If the federal government had adopted a default budget mechanism, House Republicans and Democrats might still be bickering over the passage of a timely new budget. But the government would continue running while lawmakers negotiated.
So what do you think? It sounds reasonable, but what are the arguments against their "default budget policy"?