For our side though, it will be easier omitting it from one smaller appropriation bill than from one giant omnibus screw-you to the American people.
I agree. Passing those 12 individual appropriations bills is the way to go. That's going to be difficult to do under these rules, and with only a 4 vote cushion, but perhaps it could be done if the entire caucus was committed to actually passing those bills. But here's the problem:
Absolutely. The goal here should not be getting the Republican agenda passed. The goal should to block the Uniparty from getting their agenda passed.
You seem to have very little interest in actually passing those those 12 smaller appropriations bills. You just view having that rule as a way to stymie Democrats, not a way to actually pass legislation. And I suspect Gaetz and Co,. agree with you. Hope I'm wrong, but I suspect not.
In any case, what that means is that when it gets down to the wire in September/October, and there still are a few of the biggest bills outstanding, what do you suppose is going to happen when the Freedom Caucus refuses to budge on anything? Well...the Rules can be changed by a majority of the House, and a "Speaker in a straightjacket" isn't going to be able to stop it even if he wanted to. And you'll have a half-done or more Nancy Mace types unwilling to be held responsible for the government shutting down, and they'll cave. So you'll end up with a coalition of 212 Democrats and a half-dozen plus Republicans amending the rules, and ramming through that last-minute omnibus spending package. And because the Freedom Caucus will have made themselves irrelevant by refusing to compromise on anything, the Democrats will hold all the cards. So rather than getting the most conservative bills that the RINO's will accept, we'll get the most leftist ones that they'll accept.
If you want separate appropriations bills to work, you have to start with the goal of actually getting them passed. But that doesn't appear to be the case.