Hypocrisy at its finest. When Democrats controlled Congress and White House, and needed GOP votes to pass a budget or CR, guess who put up demands like cutting spending, or end the ACA or part of it? Yep, the same GOP that's in control now, and that wants to blame this year's shutdown on the Democrats.
I'd have to look at the House passed CR if it's not 1k pages like the BBB was. But I need to find unbiased info on what Democrats want vs what Conservative websites are saying (healthcare for illegals, I find unbelievable)My opinion and mine alone and not my employer's.

@DennisinPeoria : Yet they argue we foot all bills. We pay taxes to support them and now pay taxes to support illegals. Seems people have different opinions on what is legal and illegal.

NOBODY is "supporting" paying for [ illegal ] immigrants. The radical GOP needs to ✋️ STOP pushing that outright LIE!

@bn13814 :
Ok, show me an unbiased source that says Dems want Medicaid funding for illegals and those who no longer qualify.

....

From the New York Times today:Explaining a Democratic Talking Point About the Shutdown
Democrats have misused budget jargon to assail the Republican budget proposal as "dirty," but the bill is considered "clean."

 

By Linda Qiu
Reporting from Washington
Sept. 30, 2025 Updated 9:18 p.m. ET

 

As the federal government nears a shutdown ahead of a midnight deadline, Democrats and Republicans remain deeply divided.

 

Republicans are insisting on a straightforward extension of existing funding. Democrats are demanding an extension of subsidies for the Affordable Care Act and a rollback of health care cuts, misusing budget jargon to deem the Republican budget proposal "dirty."

 

Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the House minority leader, argued in an interview on CNBC on Tuesday morning that the Republican proposal was not "clean" because it continued funding levels enacted in March, which passed with virtually no Democratic support in the House.

 

Left unsaid: Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the minority leader in the other chamber, and eight other Senate Democrats voted for the March bill. Moreover, in terminology about government spending and the appropriations process, "clean" refers to budget bills that keep existing funding level without extraneous provisions or significant policy changes.

 

Earlier in September, Republicans in the House passed what is known as a continuing resolution, or a temporary funding bill, that would simply extend federal funding through Nov. 21. It also includes $88 million in funding for security for congressional lawmakers, the Supreme Court and executive branch personnel after the killing of the conservative personality Charlie Kirk. Because it is relatively free of major policy or funding changes, stakeholder groups like the National Association of Counties have characterized this bill as a "clean C.R."

 

"The House C.R. is just about as clean of a C.R. as you could get. They really did seem to not want to rock the boat with it," said Chris Towner, the policy director of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a group advocating federal deficit reduction.

 

Congress has passed an average of 4.8 continuing resolutions every fiscal year since 1998, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, and most contain "anomalies," or provisions that make changes to existing funding language. These can include extending funding for a program beyond the overall funding deadline, designating additional amounts of money for a specific program, or prohibiting certain uses of funding. Some of these changes can be technical, relatively minor or apolitical, like the increased security funding in the Republicans' budget proposal. So these bills are typically considered "clean."

 

But other continuing resolutions are more politically motivated or cause significant changes in policy. For example, one passed in 1984 contained an entire bill that made sweeping changes to federal criminal law. The current Republican budget proposal contains no such modifications. Mr. Towner said that most continuing resolutions that contain large funding or policy changes are enacted with bipartisan support. For example, a continuing resolution in the 2023 fiscal year included billions of dollars funding for Ukraine's defense.

 

Congress last passed a continuing resolution in March that contained more changes to spending, including a $6 billion increase for the military and a $13 billion cut to nondefense spending. Because of the scale of these modifications, claims that the Republican's March proposal was not "clean" had more merit.

 

Mr. Jeffries's office also argued that because the Trump administration has repeatedly revoked funding for an array of congressionally approved programs, the past understanding of "clean" no longer applied.

 

Under the Biden administration, Congress passed several "clean" continuing resolutions, according to the earlier understanding of the term, with Republican support. But Republicans also attempted, and failed, to use the budget resolutions to advance their own political aims. For example, in September 2024, Speaker Mike Johnson tried to pair the spending bill with legislation requiring people to prove their U.S. citizenship when they register to vote. A bipartisan majority rejected that plan before approving a "clean" spending proposal.

 

Linda Qiu is a Times reporter who specializes in fact-checking statements made by politicians and public figures. She has been reporting and fact-checking public figures for nearly a decade.

I thought New York Times was considered by Conservatives to be Liberally biased, trash like CNN and MSNBC?
So I'm not ready to count it.

@DennisinPeoria :
What? You want me to quote Fox News instead? You'll believe that?

@PeoriaChronicle :
Fox News doesn't count either. Nor does Blaze, OAN, Newsmax, Breitbart ,Wall St Journal, New York Post, Washington Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, Associated Press, CNN, MSNBC. Not sure about Reuters either.
Simply because of the views of these networks and publications by both Liberals and Conservatives.
But a news source from Merry Old England might be more unbiased.
My opinion and I'm sticking to it.

@CCubs : Haven't you been paying your taxes. You're supporting.

@PeoriaChronicle :
After reading through some of the political rhetoric. Them long drawn-out sentences of garble. The swamp needs emptied.

@DennisinPeoria :
LOL. None of the news outlets you mentioned even matter. The only news outlet that matters is RAV.