Re: Gaetz: What is the worst thing that can happen if the govt isnt funded?

What I like about what Gaetz did was that it was mainly a consequence for the former speaker not keeping promises on things like single-subject bills, adequate review period prior to votes, etc. Basically actions that work towards draining the swamp and shrinking government, reducing waste and fraud and corruption. It is a very principled stance that I think most Americans agree with.

The other side of the republican caucus is arguing that you have to compromise to get things done. A dem senate and executive branch means if want any bill passed it has to be a compromise with them, including bills that fund government at a minimum.

Ive been thinking about this today and not sure how to answer it: If Gaetz had his way and the House had a speaker that only voted on and passed very conservative bills that shrink government and shrink spending dramatically, bills the dems will not support and pass in the senate, the government would naturally shut down. But then so what? Doesnt this mean the minority republicans in the house hold all the cards? Do conservatives care if the government isnt funded? Is that better than out of control debt and spending? Help me understand why we shouldn't threaten to shut down the government in order to get very conservative-friendly bills passed, like a budget for starters.