That's not an offer, that's their demand for something they alone want coupled to something both Democrats
and Republicans want.
Yes it is an offer. I'd classify it as an unreasonable offer, but an offer none the less. Your link contains no discernible info on what "Dems and Reps want". Some blather that certain House members have certain agendas.
Again, that's not an offer, that's a different demand for something they alone want coupled to something both Democrats and Republicans want.
Wrong. The House originates spending & budget bills, and then they go to Senate for markup & modification, then usually to a reconciliation committee for a draft meant to pass both House&Senate. This is a legit OFFER, and can be revised in any way the Senate wants - if Harry Reid allows it. Reid's refusal ids intransigence.
Funding the government gives both Democrats and Republicans something they want...so what do Democrats get in return for acceding to the additional demands made by Republicans?
Go read the definition of "demand" vs "offer" and then read your HS civics text and then drop your hyperbolic language on the topic. OF COURSE the House offered terms to their advantage, and the Senate should respond with a compromise they find advantageous.
The ACA is greatly disliked by a large segment of the population. It was developed and passed in a uni-partisan manner. Someday the other party will own the Whitehouse and the Congress and without any buy-in they may kill the ACA. It's in the Dem interest to get some form of Rep acceptance/involvement for their bill. This is an small opening.
If you imagine that an unread one-party ACA bill drafted in the middle of the night is perfect - then you are a fool. This is an opportunity for Dems to delay & revise and improve the ACA and make it workable. As it stands it's got serious fraud and security issues, and the device make tax seems ill-advised. The waivers and exemptions look illegal to me.
On the politics only - the Reps (IMO) are making a serious mistake by not forcing the immediate implementation of ACA and removing waivers and exemptions for all. It would likely be a train-wreck and prehaps fail or bust the budget. Reps are giving Dems a grand opening to revise an improve and to blame the Reps for the delay to boot.
So the Dems get some Rep fingerprints on the deed, they get a chance to improve the very troubled program and to blame the Reps for the delay. I'm not a Dem (nor a Rep) and so I can't speak to what else they want in the budget.
There's nothing to compromise with.
Nonsense. The Senate got an offer that does address some real looking problems - the Senate could propose any counter they want. Failing to do so makes them the obstinate ones.
Again, what are the Republicans offering to Democrats in return for these things?
They are offering one position on the budget - and one that includes everything including ACA funding along with a delay and attempts to address perceived problems in ACA. It's up to the Senate to counter.
Say you want $15k for your used car and I offer you $14k if you buy new tires and get the engine checked. You can't say that's not a valid offer. You can't claim it's a "demand". You can't argue that my position didn't include anything for you. You are viewing the "Dems get everything they want" position as the center point for negotiation when that is blatantly unreasonable and unilateral. Look up "compromise" and consider than not everyone (maybe not a majority) wants this one-party bill.
The Dems may eventually lose the entire ACA if they can't create a compromise.
