this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2023
326 points (95.0% liked)

politics

19090 readers
2573 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
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Poob@lemmy.ca 44 points 1 year ago

Even her daughter is on the cusp of being too old to hold office

[–] ggBarabajagal@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I agree with others here who point out that merely having a PoA in place is not a reason that Feinstein should resign. As to whether she should resign for other reasons, I tend think she probably should. But then I think about all the reasons that she shouldn't.

Feinstein is a high-ranking member of the senatorial judiciary committee. Back in April, she asked to be temporarily replaced in that position, but the Republicans blocked that from happening.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/republicans-block-temporary-replacement-for-sen-feinstein-on-judiciary-committee

The judiciary committee slot is important, because those are the guys who confirm all the federal judges. After sandbagging Obama's appointees for ~eight~ six years, the Republican-controlled Senate confirmed a flurry of judges under Trump.

To try to catch up now, the currently Democrat-controlled (by the thinnest possible margin) Senate Judiciary Committee wants to confirm as many Biden-appointed judges as it can while it still can. A year-and-a-half from now, who knows who will control what?

Sure, Feinstein should step down, and I think even she probably knows that, but she also knows that when she does so, the Democrats lose their razor-thin Senate majority, at least until Newsom can appoint a replacement.

No matter how quickly Feinstein could be replaced, the transition would offer Republicans easy opportunities to further delay nominations and block legislation of the very sort that Feinstein was elected by the people of California to pass. Nominations and legislation we have every reason to believe that she fully comprehends, regardless of any PoAs in place, and even despite her recent display of other age-related lapses in focus.

Anyway though, maybe her tragic act of hubris in all this was running for another term way back in 2018. If she had resigned back then, instead of next year, we wouldn't be here now. But now that we're here, I don't blame her for recognizing the no-win nature of the situation.

[–] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 year ago

Her and RBG. Sheesh, realize you're mortal and that there are implications to overstaying your office.

Maximum age laws for ALL government positions, now. And make it 65, if it's good enough for us poors, they should have to abide by the same age limit.

[–] obscura_max@lemm.ee 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Newsome could replace her in a weekend and Senate Republicans' ability to block her replacement on the committee would be moot. Any excuses for her not resigning fall apart at the slightest bit of interrogation. She and the leaches in her circle just don't want to give up their power.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

How would it be moot? They will block a replacement on the committee before the next election.

[–] dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Is that actually how it would play out or just the most ideal scenario?

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m tired of living in a geriocracy this is not the way that things ought to be

[–] kool_newt@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Bootywind@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Geronimocracy

[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago

PoA can also be used so you don't have to be there to buy a car or a house, potentially useful for someone who is frequently away from home for work.

Or if you are a politically important person and your husband died in 2022, it might be good to have someone designated to determine your health affairs if you become physically incapacitated.

Not saying she's currently able to perform the duties of her office, but having a PoA isn't a reason why she isn't.

[–] SquatchPodiatrist@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Just because a person has a POA doesn’t mean it’s in effect.

My parents are in their 50s and have POAs in place as a precaution.

[–] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 year ago

She's 90. I've never had a relative make it past 85 without them having to give PoA to someone.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

FUCKING RESIGN ALREADY!

[–] kingthrillgore@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Tell me you're unqualified to be in the Senate without saying you're unqualified.

[–] dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Tell me you don't understand when PoA is instituted without telling me.

[–] flipht@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Feinstein's a terrible senator, which should surprise no one, since she's not been particularly good at any of her jobs.

Additionally, her cognitive abilities seem to have declined substantially.

All of this is completely independent from a power of attorney, which is absolutely normal and should be something all families discuss doing when they have responsible adult children. If you do not do this, it would take a court order to help out a parent who gets admitted to the hospital suddenly but still needs to pay bills, or you'd have to get the person declared incompetent if they are being scammed and you need to step in to fix it.

Power of attorney sets up the framework for dealing with those issues in a timely manner, but it has to be done while the person is competent and of sound mind, so you have to do it before shit hits the fan.

Also, for family finance planning, keep in mind that medicaid has means and asset tests that basically mean old people have to spend everything before they can get the government to pay for long term care. And the government can claw back property if it is transferred within a few years of needing that safety net. My mom and her mom worked all this shit out years in advance and it went very smoothly, compared to my father's paranoid parents who wound up having to fork over hundreds of thousands of dollars that they spent their whole lives saving, just to have necessary medical care in their 80s and 90s.

Plan ahead, folks.

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

She became a representative without being elected using this ONE WEIRD TRICK!!!

[–] HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.one 1 points 1 year ago

Oh hey that’s not good at all.
California let ya girl rest.

[–] _haha_oh_wow_@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

People like Feinstein, McConnell, etc. should not still be serving, this is insane!