March 15 will be an important day.

[Ragnarök_62]

(03-15-2017, 06:53 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: In regard to US Notes...It wasn't brought up in the MSM because that means that the US could attempt immediately to implement MMT to tackle the depression.

... <snip>
It sounds exotic if one doesn't realize that the US does have a history with more than one type of money.  Indeed myself I'd like to see the Federal Reserve abolished.  After all Congress has the power to coin money so let them coin it.

1.  Yeah, I'd like to see the Private Banking Cartel, the FED abolished as well.  Fuck usury for the masses.


2. Yes, MMT is pretty much the way to go.  It's a weird theory though.  MMT is basically Austrian School married with  Neo-Kensyesnism.  I think it's better , because interest stuff is geometric debt growth, which we all know does not work, since geometric debt growth isn't sustainable, while linear "real bills" are.

3. I'd prefer debt based on "real bills", that is short term notes based on short term, max 60 day notes issued by industry/service entities avoids stupid shit like asset bubbles/ questionable debt ( hedge fund bets) is avoided.

4. PS. States can and will allow bills of credit based on the PMC [precious metals complex] to be allowed as "legal tender".  [url= https://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/e...r-as-money] Arizona, [/url] Utah, and now, I think Idaho, allow bills to be printed with precious metal backing.


5. Another idea:   Allow bills of credit, based on Mwatts, to be printed by power companies! I think a unit of credit, say 1 dollar  = 1 MJoule would be awesome. Energy production is pretty elastic, so let's let 1$ = 1 Mjoule of power added to the grid.  That would , yes, be awesome, yes, awesome, because Rags thought it up, yes, Rags did. Rags is like Trump, that way.  Rags and Trump like creative destruction, yes we do, yes.  Destroy the FED, yes, let's just "DO IT" ™.Xer style, take down the church of debt, the FED.  Tear it down, smash it to pieces, ya got me, there Kinser79? Rags is a Joneser, we , us Jonersers like fireworks for the 4T, let's spark the sky! Yehahhaaah.
, man.
6. For, may it be so, let it be, the status quo, has got to go!     I'm Jonsen's for the destruction of the FED.

[Kinser79]

(03-15-2017, 07:36 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: 1.  Yeah, I'd like to see the Private Banking Cartel, the FED abolished as well.  Fuck usury for the masses.

Not really the reason I wanted to kill the Fed. The ultimate goal for me is to put the country on a sound money format. Naturally of course gold and silver will be in the mix.

Quote:2. Yes, MMT is pretty much the way to go.  It's a weird theory though.  MMT is basically Austrian School married with  Neo-Kensyesnism.  I think it's better , because interest stuff is geometric debt growth, which we all know does not work, since geometric debt growth isn't sustainable, while linear "real bills" are.

I was thinking more along the lines of using US Notes to pay the bills that need to be paying without issuing debt while meanwhile strangling the fed. The MMT is to tackle things on budget already and for putting people to work projects that can be budgeted in prior to placing the country on sound money. I expect there to be inflation to stuff into that giant whole that's been created called the National Debt. When you can pay your debts off with wall paper you should do so.

Quote:3. I'd prefer debt based on "real bills", that is short term notes based on short term, max 60 day notes issued by industry/service entities avoids stupid shit like asset bubbles/ questionable debt ( hedge fund bets) is avoided.

Those can be used. I'd place a maximum at a 2 year note.

Quote:4. PS. States can and will allow bills of credit based on the PMC [precious metals complex] to be allowed as "legal tender".  [url= https://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/e...r-as-money] Arizona, [/url] Utah, and now, I think Idaho, allow bills to be printed with precious metal backing.

According to the constitution states are allowed to make gold and silver coin legal tender. If they are issuing paper money backed by gold and/silver that might prove problematic.

Quote:5. Another idea:   Allow bills of credit, based on Mwatts, to be printed by power companies! I think a unit of credit, say 1 dollar  = 1 MJoule would be awesome. Energy production is pretty elastic, so let's let 1$ = 1 Mjoule of power added to the grid.

1 Megajoule would be too small a unit to use for 1 dollar. It takes 3.6 Megajoule to make up a Kilowatt hour of electricity. FPL charges 9.184 CENTS per kWh, so 9.184 cents / 3.6 yeilds 1 MJ = 2.5511... cents. So we'd need to make the bills of credit around 10 kWh as the standard to make 1 dollar.

 

Quote: That would , yes, be awesome, yes, awesome, because Rags thought it up, yes, Rags did. Rags is like Trump, that way.  Rags and Trump like creative destruction, yes we do, yes.  Destroy the FED, yes, let's just "DO IT" ™.Xer style, take down the church of debt, the FED.  Tear it down, smash it to pieces, ya got me, there Kinser79? Rags is a Joneser, we , us Jonersers like fireworks for the 4T, let's spark the sky! Yehahhaaah.
, man.

Okay Trashcan Man. I'll set you to burn. /RandallFlagg

Quote:6. For, may it be so, let it be, the status quo, has got to go!     I'm Jonsen's for the destruction of the FED.

Honestly, like you I think we have the same problem in this country a dilapidated housing project has. No one wants to bulldoze it but everyone wants a nicer project. Me I want things to burn so so the competent Millies can get to building--a whole lot of bullshit in their way--and it will kill off the speshul snowflake weaklings.

[Eric the Green]

(03-15-2017, 07:36 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(03-15-2017, 06:53 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: In regard to US Notes...It wasn't brought up in the MSM because that means that the US could attempt immediately to implement MMT to tackle the depression.

... <snip>
It sounds exotic if one doesn't realize that the US does have a history with more than one type of money.  Indeed myself I'd like to see the Federal Reserve abolished.  After all Congress has the power to coin money so let them coin it.

1.  Yeah, I'd like to see the Private Banking Cartel, the FED abolished as well.  Fuck usury for the masses.


2. Yes, MMT is pretty much the way to go.  It's a weird theory though.  MMT is basically Austrian School married with  Neo-Kensyesnism.  I think it's better , because interest stuff is geometric debt growth, which we all know does not work, since geometric debt growth isn't sustainable, while linear "real bills" are.

3. I'd prefer debt based on "real bills", that is short term notes based on short term, max 60 day notes issued by industry/service entities avoids stupid shit like asset bubbles/ questionable debt ( hedge fund bets) is avoided.

4. PS. States can and will allow bills of credit based on the PMC [precious metals complex] to be allowed as "legal tender".  [url= https://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/e...r-as-money] Arizona, [/url] Utah, and now, I think Idaho, allow bills to be printed with precious metal backing.


5. Another idea:   Allow bills of credit, based on Mwatts, to be printed by power companies! I think a unit of credit, say 1 dollar  = 1 MJoule would be awesome. Energy production is pretty elastic, so let's let 1$ = 1 Mjoule of power added to the grid.  That would , yes, be awesome, yes, awesome, because Rags thought it up, yes, Rags did. Rags is like Trump, that way.  Rags and Trump like creative destruction, yes we do, yes.  Destroy the FED, yes, let's just "DO IT" ™.Xer style, take down the church of debt, the FED.  Tear it down, smash it to pieces, ya got me, there Kinser79? Rags is a Joneser, we , us Jonersers like fireworks for the 4T, let's spark the sky! Yehahhaaah.
, man.
6. For, may it be so, let it be, the status quo, has got to go!     I'm Jonsen's for the destruction of the FED.

I'm cool with "hey hey, ho ho; status quo has got to go!"

But Drump? There's nothing "creative" about his destruction. It's just, destruction. Fireworks? OK. The only thing to hope for is that he sparks the movement on the other side so we can go in the other direction and smash the oligarchy that he so thoroughly and completely represents, boosts and personifies.

I see no sign that Drump has the FED in his sights though. I am fine with the Fed myself, as you know. And Janet Yellen is one badly-needed corner of sanity in the government today.

[Kinser79]

(03-15-2017, 10:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm cool with "hey hey, ho ho; status quo has got to go!"

Then explain your support for HRC. There was no other candidate on the Ballot except perhaps Mr Low-Energy Jeb! himself that was more status quo.

Quote:But Drump? There's nothing "creative" about his destruction. It's just, destruction.

Have you stopped to consider that maybe his role is to be the destroyer and someone else is the creator? Shiva is not Brahman and Brahman is not Shiva. Without destruction there can be no recreation. Without demolition there is no construction.

Quote: Fireworks? OK. The only thing to hope for is that he sparks the movement on the other side so we can go in the other direction and smash the oligarchy that he so thoroughly and completely represents, boosts and personifies.

Unlikely to happen. At most you have some speshul snowflakes running around thinking it is 1968 but reality will smack them upside the head. If they become problematic they will be dealt with. X is in charge of State and Local governments and except for Blue Majority areas we simply are not going to tolerate rioting and looting.

Quote:I see no sign that Drump has the FED in his sights though. I am fine with the Fed myself, as you know. And Janet Yellen is one badly-needed corner of sanity in the government today.

UH...The Fed isn't part of the government. It is a private entitity, that the President appoints someone from their board to be their head is nothing but Kabuki Theatre. Secondly Trump probably can't take the Fed on directly. That said so-far Janet Yellen has seemed to be cautious with raising the interest rates.

[The Wonkette]

(03-15-2017, 03:47 PM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(03-15-2017, 03:38 PM)Galen Wrote:

(03-15-2017, 12:48 PM)The Wonkette Wrote:

(03-14-2017, 03:12 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: I dunno, we have run into debt ceilings before.  Let's hold off and see what actually happens, first.

The Government will take "extraordinary steps" to keep everything running until early summer, when those tricks won't work anymore.  As SomeGuy has said, we've done this song and dance.  

April 18 will be when things start to get interesting, because the Government's Continuing Resolution expires.  So Congress will have to figure out at what level to fund the Government prior to that; otherwise, it is 2013 all over again (Government shutdown) until they get some kind of spending bill out.  Once they figure that out, they'll also have to decide whether or not to raise the debt ceiling this summer.

Your analysis assumes that Trump will behave as everyone else has.  Trump has a habit of doing the unexpected and that seems unlikely to change.

I've found with Trump when everyone else zigs he zags.  Personally I think the major show down will be on Ryancare if it ever gets out of committee.

Well, its business as usual. I just received this letter today.

Quote:As has happened many times before, the Treasury Department will prevent the United States from defaulting on its obligations by suspending certain obligations that would count against the debt limit. Secretary Mnuchin indicated that “extraordinary measures” would be taken until Congress raises the debt limit, and that these measures could continue until around August or September.

You will recall that one of the measures is to use funds that are dedicated to the Civil Service Disability and Retirement Fund and the G Fund of the Thrift Savings Plan. Every time in the past, once the debt limit was increased, these Funds were made whole, as required by law. Federal employees and retirees and their income were unaffected by these actions in the past, and we expect that to be the case this time. Secretary Mnuchin has asked Congress to raise the debt limit “at the first opportunity.”

As I said earlier, the fun begins next month.

[Kinser79]

(03-17-2017, 03:58 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Tell me, were our government systems destroyed during the Great Power 4T? Is this sort of "burn it all down" destruction the only path?

1.  Very nearly.  They come under great strain every 4T.

2.  It is a path to be sure.  So unless you plan on offering an alternative that is more than merely more kicking the can down the road....

[Eric the Green]

(03-16-2017, 08:31 AM)Kinser79 Wrote:

(03-15-2017, 10:48 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I'm cool with "hey hey, ho ho; status quo has got to go!"

Then explain your support for HRC.  There was no other candidate on the Ballot except perhaps Mr Low-Energy Jeb! himself that was more status quo.

Quote:But Drump? There's nothing "creative" about his destruction. It's just, destruction.

Have you stopped to consider that maybe his role is to be the destroyer and someone else is the creator?  Shiva is not Brahman and Brahman is not Shiva.  Without destruction there can be no recreation.  Without demolition there is no construction.

Quote: Fireworks? OK. The only thing to hope for is that he sparks the movement on the other side so we can go in the other direction and smash the oligarchy that he so thoroughly and completely represents, boosts and personifies.

Unlikely to happen.  At most you have some speshul snowflakes running around thinking it is 1968 but reality will smack them upside the head.  If they become problematic they will be dealt with.  X is in charge of State and Local governments and except for Blue Majority areas we simply are not going to tolerate rioting and looting.

Quote:I see no sign that Drump has the FED in his sights though. I am fine with the Fed myself, as you know. And Janet Yellen is one badly-needed corner of sanity in the government today.

UH...The Fed isn't part of the government.  It is a private entitity, that the President appoints someone from their board to be their head is nothing but Kabuki Theatre.  Secondly Trump probably can't take the Fed on directly.  That said so-far Janet Yellen has seemed to be cautious with raising the interest rates.

Sorry, one debate with you is probably one debate too many

[Mikebert]

(03-15-2017, 05:10 PM)SomeGuy Wrote:

Quote:Thanks, I was not aware of a money-issuing facility still operative today that was not the Fed.  However, are this notes fiat currency that can be issued in unlimited quantities without backing, or at they required to be backed by specie? If the former, why wasn't this being discussed in previous debt brinkmanship times? We had such things as the platinum coin, which is pretty out of the box.  Why not issuing notes?

No problem.  And no, US Notes are not and have never been backed by specie, though the government was occasionally willing to redeem them for such when asked.  They're "greenbacks", Mike, come on!

As for why it wasn't discussed?  I have no idea, probably for the same reason you just asked.  People in the media hadn't thought of them.  I have seen some mention of them on blogs and the like for about a decade now.  If I am not mistaken, debt ceiling legislation specifically excludes US Notes from the debt ceiling calculation, despite them being in effect non-interest bearing instruments of credit.

I just read the Wiki article.  I remember those things, they had the red serial numbers you would occasionally see on.

[SomeGuy]

Quote:I just read the Wiki article.  I remember those things, they had the red serial numbers you would occasionally see on.

I realize you like to edit your posts multiple times, adding stuff as you go, but really?  Not even gonna finish that last thought? On what?

[Bob Butler 54]

CNN notes Saturday, April 29, will mark President Trump's 100th day in office. But will it also mark Day 1 of a government shutdown?

This is just the first main stream media article I've noted warning of a looming shutdown. Well, second. McCain is looking for a jump in military spending, and is threatening to withhold his vote if he doesn't get it.

CNN is hinting that the difficulties in getting it passed seem similar to the health care repeal and replace. The Republicans want to do a lot of stuff that the Democrats don't like, while the split Republican factions are strong.

We'll see...

[Eric the Green]

Probably the government shutdowns were aimed at Democratic presidents (Obama and Clinton). I don't think Trump wants to shut down the government he now heads. I don't think Democrats want to shut it down to attack Trump.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-30-2017, 10:04 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: Probably the government shutdowns were aimed at Democratic presidents (Obama and Clinton). I don't think Trump wants to shut down the government he now heads. I don't think Democrats want to shut it down to attack Trump.

The dynamic is funky.  There are a bunch of people who will all withhold their votes if they don't get their way on certain general highly partisan issues.  The Democrats will generally balk at an attempt to defund Planned Paranthood or Obamacare, for example.  McCain wants much better funding for the military, or he will withhold his vote.  A lot of Tea Party folk will balk if the budget overall isn't reduced.

The dynamic might echo the health debate.  There might be no middle ground where a sufficient majority of legislature is happy enough to vote yes.  It's just about given that any compromise that will have most of both Republican wings happy will get no votes from the Democratic side.  On the health issue, the Tea Party crowd was stubborn enough that all attempts to keep them happy just turned off the establishment Republicans.  There was on establishment guy who changed his vote from no to hell no.  Result...  fail.

I don't know that that many people want to shut down the government for the sake of political grandstanding, but there are a lot of people who won't let this issue or that be funded or defunded.

We'll just have to see.

In the past, the shut down the government votes have seldom resulted in major policy shifts.  After much yelling and screaming, something gets passed that extends the status quo.  The big issues get settled on their own votes.  While shut down votes are great for playing chicken in the press, they haven't been a good tool for actually changing policy.

But the division among the Republicans might have changed things.  If that disagreement was strong enough that they couldn't agree to repeal Obamacare, it might be strong enough to generate a real shutdown.

[Eric the Green]

(03-30-2017, 04:57 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: But the division among the Republicans might have changed things.  If that disagreement was strong enough that they couldn't agree to repeal Obamacare, it might be strong enough to generate a real shutdown.

The problem with that is, who are the extreme right-wingers going to get to agree to a shutdown, if they can't agree with the folks on their own side? The Democrats are of no mind to shut down the government; they like most of its programs and activities. It's only the right-wing that wants to shut it down. When Obama was the president, most of the Republicans went along with their right wing. But now that the shut-downers have their own president in the White House, they can't seem to agree. Even though Trump is appointing to cabinet positions people whose announced intention is to destroy the agency that they were appointed to lead. 

Unless a majority of the majority Republicans in the House can shut down the government, a shutdown now might have to be an announced goal and proposal of Mr. Trump himself for it to succeed. Is that likely?

[Kinser79]

Bob, When I see that a story is by CNN I immediately ignore it these days. They've been wrong about so much, so often for such a long time that it is difficult to take them seriously.

While I do think what you're seeing is accurate, I think that the primary problem within the GOP is between the GOP establishment [Neoliberals/NeoCons and Wall Street] (which is what McCain is) and the Trumpist wing. (Tea Party, Libertarians, Civic Nationalists, Classical Liberals, Conservative Democrats turned off by the loud and obnoxious SJW of the other party)

What I don't think will happen will be a governmental shut down. Ryan will lose control of the House before that happens and he's the major road block at present. I see two options, he loses his speaker ship (Likely since he's expending lots of political capital on pointless and unpopular measures) or it looks really bad for him. Everyone knows by now that if there is a government shut down it is because of Congress.

As for getting Democrat votes? I don't think anyone with any brains expects them to help on any of the President's agenda. That's politics as usual, which that party has already indicated it is going to attempt by keeping Pelosi as minority leader in the House and having Durban as minority leader in the Senate. Both were key in the last 8 years of utter failure.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-30-2017, 09:35 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Bob,  When I see that a story is by CNN I immediately ignore it these days.  They've been wrong about so much, so often for such a long time that it is difficult to take them seriously.

Yep.  Partisans chose their sources of Truth selectively.  I'm taking everything with a grain of salt these days.  My problem with the shutdown issues as discussed on this thread based on partisan sources is that things were supposed to come to a head around March 15.  CNN is saying it will come to a head around the end of April, on Trump's 100th day.  Possible shut downs are supposed to be media events.  It was and remains hard to see a stealth shut down.  Thus, I assumed the partisan minor news organizations that were pushing the issue early had a partisan agenda.  CNN starting the media brouhaha with a fairly low level piece one month before the climax feels might more right than the partisan reporting.  While I am hardly a trusting blind follower of CNN, their timing at least of what might happen feels more correct.

Yes, I expect it to be the norm for an extreme partisan to totally dismiss information from a source that says something the partisan doesn't want to here.  I'm just dubious all around, and start trusting stuff only after multiple sources with different angles and agendas start saying similar things.

[Kinser79]

I would consider CNN to be a partisan news source.

And of course all of this assumes that the President doesn't invoke EO 11110. Government shut downs happen not because the government is out of money but because the treasury cannot issue more debt instruments (mostly only of interest to investors or the Fed). But if the Treasury has power to issue debt, it also has power to issue non-debt. US notes wouldn't be counted toward the debt ceiling and the legislation is already in place having been put in there by another controversial Republican President.

[Bob Butler 54]

(03-30-2017, 10:15 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: I would consider CNN to be a partisan news source.

A quite reasonable assertion.  Most big news organizations are located in major urban areas.  They are not immune to the local culture, and lean blue even without deliberate corporate decisions to tell people what they want to hear.  As I said, I try to take news from any source with a grain of salt.

But red and blue perceptions are so skewed that I doubt there would be a general consensus on any news organization being, um, fair and balanced.  Would you and Eric care to get together to try to find a truly neutral news source?

(03-30-2017, 10:15 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: And of course all of this assumes that the President doesn't invoke EO 11110.  Government shut downs happen not because the government is out of money but because the treasury cannot issue more debt instruments (mostly only of interest to investors or the Fed).  But if the Treasury has power to issue debt, it also has power to issue non-debt.  US notes wouldn't be counted toward the debt ceiling and the legislation is already in place having been put in there by another controversial Republican President.

Good luck with that.  I visited Wiki's entry on EO 11110, and found among other things...

Quote:Revocation

The text that had been added to E.O. 10289 by E.O. 11110 remained on the books until President Ronald Reagan issued Executive Order 12608 on September 9, 1987 as part of a general clean-up of executive orders. Executive Order 12608 revoked subparagraph (j) of paragraph 1 of Executive Order 10289, as amended by Executive Order 11110.[15] Thus, E.O. 12608 specifically revoked the relevant portion of E.O. 10289 that had been added by E.O. 11110. This action effectively revoked E.O. 11110. By this time, however, the remaining legislative authority behind E.O. 11110 had been repealed by Congress when Pub.L. 97–258 was passed in 1982.

In March 1964, Secretary of the Treasury C. Douglas Dillon halted redemption of silver certificates for silver dollars. In the 1970s, large numbers of the remaining silver dollars in the mint vaults were sold to the collecting public for collector value. All redemption in silver ceased on June 24, 1968.

I didn't chase down all the details, but JFK signed EO 11110 at a time when US currency was backed with metals.  The major problem it tried to address was the government's hoarding of silver to back currency at a time when industry needed more and more silver for technical use.  It is hardly surprising, given that we're currently working a floating currency, that the authority to issue metal based currency is long gone.

Now if one hops around highly political web sites, you will eventually find one that tells you what you want to hear.  For me, the smaller and more partisan the web sight, the more dubious I get.  Just out of curiosity, what was your source on EO 11110?

I've heard other methods by which the executive branch might usurp Congress's power of the purse.   I've been taking them about as seriously as I take UFOs and the Loch Ness monster.  My gut feeling is that they should all be unconstitutional.  You shouldn't be able to usurp the power of the purse using executive orders.  The way the Supreme Court works these days, who really knows?

Anyway, I'll start taking such schemes seriously when they start being reported from a variety of sources with divergent perspectives and agendas.

[Kinser79]

Wikipeida is a poor source for legal advice. The amendments to those executive orders can be revoked by executive order--which is how EOs work. Suffice it to say not even Regan managed to render EO 11110 in operable. Suffice it to say I get a lot of my economic advice from Zero Hedge--I find them to be spot on more than wrong.

As to the currency I'd propose that the Dollar is still backed but not by metals--but rather by its ability to buy Saudi oil. It is no wonder that the countries of Iraq and Libya have been destroyed. Saddam for all his faults wanted to conduct oil trades in Euro and Gaddafi was proposing using a gold dinar for Pan-African use.

Today's bugbears Iran and Russia are harder to destroy. On the one hand, Iran is only probably a nuclear power already, but also a very mountainous country that is difficult to invade. The last successful invasion of Iran was done by Alexander and hasn't been attempted since. Russia can and will fight back. Both are already no trading oil in a combination of Gold, Euro, Rubles, Rupees and RMB.

You can take the issuance of US notes as a potential work around as you please. However, it is hardly a radical solution--it isn't the 1860s any more, and if the treasure has the power to issue certificates of debt, then it surely has the power to issue certificates of non-debt (at least up till the point comes where Congress has authorized expenditures).

I don't think that the SCOTUS is something to worry about. So many justices have one foot in the grave and the other on a banana peel that it is likely that after Gorsuch gets appointed, Daddy will get at least one, if not two appointments.

[The Wonkette]

(03-30-2017, 09:35 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for getting Democrat votes?  I don't think anyone with any brains expects them to help on any of the President's agenda.  That's politics as usual, which that party has already indicated it is going to attempt by keeping Pelosi as minority leader in the House and having Durban as minority leader in the Senate.  Both were key in the last 8 years of utter failure.

Who is Durban?  Last I heard, the Senate Minority Leader was Chuck Shumer, who replaced Harry Reed, when Reed retired in January.

[Snowflake]

(03-31-2017, 02:36 PM)The Wonkette Wrote:

(03-30-2017, 09:35 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: As for getting Democrat votes?  I don't think anyone with any brains expects them to help on any of the President's agenda.  That's politics as usual, which that party has already indicated it is going to attempt by keeping Pelosi as minority leader in the House and having Durban as minority leader in the Senate.  Both were key in the last 8 years of utter failure.

Who is Durban?  Last I heard, the Senate Minority Leader was Chuck Shumer, who replaced Harry Reed, when Reed retired in January.

I think he meant Durbin.  You know that actress from Three Smart Girls.
(And, just for the record, it's Schumer and Reid. )