this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
8 points (90.0% liked)

politics

19090 readers
5300 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter@lemmy.world
aidan@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
8
How Congress Defanged Biden's Big Science Push (www.politico.com)
submitted 8 months ago by cymbal_king@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

“These aren’t the numbers I’d like to see. I’m disappointed that we can’t provide funding to match what we authorized in CHIPS and Science,” House Science Chair Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) told POLITICO in an email. “Unfortunately, in our current fiscal environment we have to make difficult decisions and that’s reflected in the budgets for these agencies.”

This is one of the major things that congress does that pisses me off. They pass legislation to do a thing, then refuse to pass legislation to fund that thing. This is horse shit. We need a constitutional amendment that states that if congress passes a law, then it is going to be paid for. If later on congress decides they don't want to pay for it then they need to repeal the law.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Two different sessions — the CHIPS act passed in 2022. At the beginning of 2023, control of Congress shifted to the Republicans, and their new leadership doesn't want to do things would improve the country. Individual Republicans may say something else, but their party position is simply set against it, and the consequential vote they cast was the one for Speaker.

[–] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Let me try to clarify. I'm saying congress should not have the option to pull this bullshit. If leadership this session doesn't want to pay for the CHIPS act they should have to repeal the act. If they can't get the votes to repeal it, then too fucking bad, they still have to pay for it.

Having funding for legislation separate from the legislation itself is the problem. Combining funding into giant budget bills that are "must pass" lets them undermine the CHIPS legislation that was passed in prior a session despite the fact that they don't have the votes to repeal it because members who support CHIPS must still vote for the budget bill to avoid a shutdown of the government.

[–] cymbal_king@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

I like how many European countries fixed the shutdown issue... Force a snap election for everyone in parliament if a budget isn't passed.