USA TODAY

President Donald Trump headed to Texas on Thursday in an effort to promote his wall and again threatened to declare a national emergency if Democrats don't agree to his demand for more wall funding.

Republicans didn't meet their deadlines

By Robert Robb

The primary cause of the government shutdown is a failure of governance by Republicans in Congress.

The federal government's fiscal year begins Oct. 1. There is a law that sets interim deadlines to ensure that a budget is in place before the new fiscal year begins.

Both chambers of Congress are to agree to a budget resolution by April 15. That resolution is supposed to create an outline within which the respective Appropriations Committees are to operate.

The House is required to pass all appropriations bills to fund the government in the upcoming year by June 30. There is no deadline for action by the Senate or adoption of a final budget. But the clear intent is for all that to get done in the summer, so the new fiscal year begins with a budget approved by Congress and signed by the president.

Talker:What happens to the Mueller investigation when Rosenstein leaves?

Sign-up for Today's Talker newsletter here

Last year, Republicans were in charge of both chambers of Congress and the presidency. Yet Oct. 1 rolled around without a budget in place for roughly a quarter of the federal government.

There is no more fundamental responsibility of Congress than passing a budget for the federal government. Republicans kept claiming that they would return to "regular order" and actually pass appropriations bills in time to avoid the drama and gamesmanship of continuing resolutions under the threat of a government shutdown.

Their failure to do so deserves most of the blame for the impasse. If they had done their job, as they pledged to do, the federal government would be fully funded for the year and no one would have the leverage to shut it down.

Is there a way out of the impasse?

At this point, a border "wall" is mostly symbolic for both sides.

A physical barrier can help inhibit illegal entry. It is not a waste of money, particularly by federal government standards. And it is not immoral. But it is also far from the main event in reducing illegal immigration.

What is immoral is the treatment of federal workers in this impasse. Workers shouldn’t be denied a paycheck because politicians can’t get their most basic task, passing a budget, done on time. Nor should they be required to work without pay, even if it will be made up in arrears.

Democrats have offered a reasonable way out of the impasse: Pass appropriations for the rest of the year for all remaining federal agencies except Homeland Security. Pass a short-term continuing resolution for Homeland Security and continue the fight over funding for physical barriers on the border.

The only possible GOP objection is that such a resolution would reduce Trump's leverage to force Democrats to give on funding the "wall."

In our system of government, the president shouldn’t have the leverage to shut down the operations of unrelated agencies to try to impose his will on a particular point. And it is irresponsible for Republicans in Congress to give him that leverage.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says he won't bring to the floor any shutdown resolution that the president isn't committed to sign. That's a mistake.

For one thing, what Trump says in advance doesn't necessarily indicate what he will do in the event. McConnell previously brought a continuing resolution to the floor, which passed, on the understanding that Trump would sign it. And then Trump reneged.

The Democratic proposal is reasonable. It would probably pass the Senate. It probably wouldn't pass with enough Republican votes to overcome a presidential veto. But there is always the possibility that it might.

Having irresponsibly failed to pass a budget when in control of both chambers of Congress, Republicans shouldn't compound the irresponsibility with truculence now that they control only one.

Robert Robb is a columnist at The Arizona Republic, where this column first appeared. You can follow him on Twitter: @RJRobb

What others are saying

Frank Bruni, The New York Times: "(The wall is) a function of, more than anything, (Trump's) ego, his vanity, to which the television networks, furloughed federal workers — all Americans — are hostage. He’s not remarkable among presidents in having a high opinion of himself and in desperately wanting others to share it. A robust measure of arrogance and some degree of neediness are what make the grind of the campaign trail and the glare of the media bearable. And all presidents want to rack up triumphs that make them look and feel large. But none in my lifetime has spun so many falsehoods in the service of that. None has been so naked in his hunger for that heft."

Jonathan Turley, The Hill: "Congress gave President Donald Trump such authority in the National Emergencies Act, augmenting claims of inherent authority, but the source of the funds could be more challenging. Under two laws in Title 10 and Title 33 of the United States Code, he could seek to use unobligated funds originally set aside for military construction projects, or divert funds from Army civil works projects. There are limitations on the use of such money, and there could be strong challenges to the use of unobligated funds in other areas. There is money there to start but not nearly enough to finish such a wall without proper appropriation."

Noah Feldman, Bloomberg: "The Constitution does contain an emergency powers clause. Article I, Section 9 allows for the suspension of habeas corpus in cases of rebellion or invasion. From the fact that the suspension clause exists, you can deduce something very basic to the U.S. constitutional system: There are no other inherent constitutional emergency powers. ... Those emergency powers are unsurprisingly varied and broad. But none of them can displace the Constitution itself. And it is the Constitution that says the Congress appropriates money and the executive spends it."

What our readers are saying

Republicans controlled the White House and Congress for two years. If this is such a crisis, why didn't they appropriate money for the wall? Because there is no crisis, just a gambit to keep the gullible, ignorant base foaming at the mouth.

— Ron David

Liberal Democrats are the party of failure. Unfortunately, there is opportunity for bad actors who are exploiting our system, and we have American taxpayers paying for it.

— Robert Williamson

Our airports are less safe now. Proper food inspections are possibly being skipped. The social safety nets are at risk. Allowing President Donald Trump to destroy our federal government this way over a failed 2016 campaign promise is un-American. Stay strong, Democrats. Don't allow Trump to get away with this or he will just do it again.

— John Bertelson

Finally, a president who has the guts to tell Democrats to go pound sand when they refuse to negotiate. Pull the cord and declare a national emergency, Mr. President, and build that wall.

— Jerry Bevins

To join the conversations about topics on USA TODAY or provide feedback to this newsletter, email jrivera@usatoday.com, comment on Facebook, or use #tellusatoday on Twitter.