US government partially shuts as Congress, Trump fail to reach deal
Washington, Dec 22 : The US government began a Christmas shutdown early Saturday, after Congress adjourned without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall.
Operations for several key agencies ceased at 12:01 am Saturday (5:01 GMT), despite last-ditch talks that continued on Capitol Hill between White House officials and congressional leaders in both parties.
Trump has dug in on his demand for USD 5 billion for construction of a wall on the US border with Mexico.
Democrats are staunchly opposed, and the absence of an elusive deal means federal funds for dozens of agencies lapsed when the clock struck midnight on Friday.
The shutdown is the third this year and it remained unclear how long it would last.
Trump expressed hope late Friday night that it "will not last long," after earlier saying he was ready for just that.
The optics are bad, as 800,000 federal employees will be either furloughed or forced to work without pay in the run-up to the Christmas holiday.
But the prospect of a large portion of government workers going without paychecks was not enough to spur lawmakers or the president to action.
The House of Representatives adjourned just before 7:00 pm Friday, with no moves taken to avert a shutdown, and the Senate closed up shop an hour later.
Both are due back in session at noon Saturday.
About three-quarters of the government, including the military and the Department of Health and Human Services, is fully funded until the end of September 2019, leaving 25 per cent unfunded as of Saturday.
Most NASA employees will be sent home, as will Commerce Department workers and many at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Agriculture and State.
National parks will remain open, but most park staff will stay home.
While most critical security functions will be operational, the effects of the budget wrangling and uncertainty have cast an air of chaos over the capital, which is also reeling from the resignation announcement Thursday by Defence Secretary Jim Mattis.
Wall Street ended its worst week in a decade with more bruising losses Friday.
And the inability of Washington to accomplish one of its most basic tasks -- keeping the government up and running -- has caused deep embarrassment and anxiety.
"It's up to the Democrats whether or not we have a shutdown tonight," Trump said earlier Friday, blaming political opponents for the crisis.
"I hope we don't," the president added, but "we're totally prepared for a very long shutdown."
Senators told reporters that congressional leaders from both parties were negotiating behind the scenes with White House officials including Vice President Mike Pence, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, and incoming chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.
The power trio shuttled from one side of the Capitol to the other, seeking a breakthrough with Republicans and Democrats. It did not come on Friday.
Should they eventually strike a deal, it could swiftly clear Congress and reach the president's desk, said Senate Republican Bob Corker.
"Now Republicans and Democrats both own the success or failure to fund government."
One focus of discussion was the USD 1.6 billion in border security funding that was a part of pending Senate legislation, number two Senate Republican John Cornyn told AFP.
But conservatives in the House would likely balk at that figure.
"There's no agreement," congressman Mark Meadows, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus of ultra-conservatives, told reporters as he left a closed-door meeting on the Capitol's Senate side.
"There's a whole lot of numbers being thrown around," but a maximum USD 1.6 billion for border security "is not acceptable." Cornyn suggested the art of the deal was less about grandstanding and more about a logical compromise to break the impasse.
"The House is at five (billion dollars for border security), the Democrats are at zero," he said.
"It doesn't sound like that's rocket science to come up with a figure."
Trump reversed course Thursday and rejected a measure that had unanimously passed the Senate and was under House consideration.
It would have extended government funding until February 8, but contained no money for a border wall, a pet project Trump has fought for since his presidential campaign.
Democrats painted Trump as the Grinch who stole the year-end deal.
"This #shutdown is brought to you by @POTUS & @HouseGOP," congresswoman Kathleen Rice tweeted.
"Instead of passing the Senate's funding bill, they decided to hold this country hostage."
With lawmakers like Meadows and prominent conservative commentators demanding that the president stick to his campaign promises, Trump doubled down on his wall.
The House swiftly passed a bill that fulfilled the president's demands. It included USD 5.7 billion in wall funding, and USD 7.8 billion in disaster relief.
But it stalled at the first hurdle in the Senate.
Trump was scheduled to fly to Florida Friday for his Christmas break, but he postponed the trip to help salvage a deal.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
'Fraud on Constitution': SC rules against religious conversion for quota benefits
New Delhi (PTI): In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court has said religious conversions undertaken solely to avail reservation benefits without genuine belief amounted to a "fraud on the Constitution".
Justices Pankaj Mithal and R Mahadevan passed the verdict on November 26 in a case filed by one C Selvarani and upheld a Madras High Court decision of January 24 denying a scheduled caste certificate to a woman who converted to Christianity but later claimed to be a Hindu to secure employment benefits.
Justice Mahadevan, who wrote the 21-page verdict for the bench, further underscored that one converted to a different religion, when they were genuinely inspired by its principles, tenets and spiritual thoughts.
"However, if the purpose of conversion is largely to derive the benefits of reservation but not with any actual belief in the other religion, the same cannot be permitted, as the extension of benefits of reservation to people with such ulterior motives will only defeat the social ethos of the policy of reservation,” he noted.
The evidence presented before the bench was found to have clearly demonstrated that the appellant professed Christianity and actively practiced the faith by attending church regularly.
"Despite the same, she claims to be a Hindu and seeks for a SC community certificate for the purpose of employment," it noted.
"Such a dual claim made by her," said the bench "was untenable and she cannot continue to identify herself as a Hindu after baptism".
The top court, therefore, held the conferment of scheduled caste communal status to the woman, who was a Christian by faith, but claimed to be still embracing Hinduism only for the purpose of availing reservation in employment, "would go against the very object of reservation and would amount to fraud on the Constitution".
The top court underlined a religious conversion solely to access reservation benefits, without genuine belief in the adopted religion, undermined the fundamental social objectives of the quota policy and her actions were contrary to the spirit of reservation policies aimed at uplifting the marginalised communities.
Selvarani, born to a Hindu father and a Christian mother, was baptised as a Christian shortly after birth but later claimed to be a Hindu and sought an SC certificate to apply for an upper division clerk position in Puducherry in 2015.
While her father belonged to the Valluvan caste, categorised under scheduled castes, he had converted to Christianity, as confirmed by documentary evidence.
The verdict said the appellant continued to practice Christianity, as seen by the regular church attendance, making her claim of being a Hindu untenable.
The bench noted individuals converting to Christianity lose their caste identity and must provide compelling evidence of reconversion and acceptance by their original caste to claim SC benefits.
The judgement said there was no substantial evidence of the appellant's reconversion to Hinduism or acceptance by the Valluvan caste.
Her claims lacked public declarations, ceremonies, or credible documentation to substantiate her assertions, it pointed out.
"One converts to a different religion when genuinely inspired by its principles. Conversion purely for reservation benefits, devoid of belief, is impermissible," the bench held.
The apex court opined in any case, upon conversion to Christianity, one lost their caste and couldn't be identified by it.
"As the factum of reconversion is disputed, there must be more than a mere claim. The conversion had not happened by any ceremony or through 'Arya Samaj'. No public declaration was effected. There is nothing on record to show that she or her family has reconverted to Hinduism and on the contrary, there is a factual finding that the appellant still professes Christianity,” it noted.
The bench said there was evidence against the appellant, and therefore, her contention raised that the caste would be under eclipse upon conversion and resumption of the caste upon reconversion, was "unsustainable".
