politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
You are missing a very important part of the GOP insanity.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hastert_Rule#:~:text=The%20Hastert%20Rule%20says%20that,would%20vote%20to%20pass%20it
Don't attempt to both sides this issue, they won't bring a bill to the floor that doesn't have support to pass WITHOUT bipartisan support. The entire GOP is run by extremists and has been for a long time. When your core principal says that you cannot be bipartisan, you are infact an extremist party by nature.
You seem to be misunderstanding the Hastert Rule. The rule does not say that the bill has to be passable without bipartisan support. It says that the Republican portion has to represent a majority of their party. I didn't say it had to be so friendly to Democrats that most Republicans wouldn't vote for it.
Also, McCarthy's Speakership won't survive turning his back on the Freedom Caucus anyways, unless the Democrats decide to back him. So there is no reason he has to follow that rule at all, if he's going to cross the aisle. Hastert himself broke the rule a dozen times according to your link.
In this case there are 221 Republicans, they would only 111 to have a majority of the party on board. Sure a true bipartisan bill would be great, but they only really need 18 democrats willing to vote along with 200 Republicans or as many Democrats as 107 with only 111 Republicans. There is a lot of wiggle room if both sides have members willing to cross the aisle.
The real problem is finding enough Side A-ers that would be willing to have their names alongside them crazy Side B-ers.
I understand your point, and you are accurate about the majority, my apologies, however; (and I did look this up and couldn't find an answer) how many of the bills passed by the house have been brought to the floor during the 118th congress were only brought forth with enough votes to pass them with GOP only votes? Are there any exceptions? Would they even bring one to the floor? It seems effectually this rule has been taken to an extreme. It appears today, McCarthy finally put on his big boy pants and is proposing a 45 day clean spending bill, but it's just kicking the can down the road again.
Many of the items put in the majority of bills that could normally pass with bipartisan support are non-starters for Democrats. These insane "anti-woke" (whatever the hell that means), policies and support/proliferation of Russian propaganda resulting in our neglect of Ukraine aid are not in our nations best interest.
It's amazing to me that under GOP control they will cut taxes, spend like lunatics, blow up the deficit, and then their constituents buy into the "fiscal conservatism" ploy, hook, line and sinker as soon as they are the opposition party. It's baffling to me. No one, especially me, disagrees with the fact that our national deficit is way beyond egregious, but shutting down the government, defaulting on debt, crashing the economy, harming our military service members, and ruining our currency and credit rating is political terrorism.
No one is willing to take on our defense spending issues, and I'm not talking about supplying our troops, I'm talking about only having one company that provides parts or equipment with no competition, changing absurd prices, and the same goes with much of our investment into equipment development. I cant recall if it's the JSF or the F22, but while they are publicly funded programs the US doesn't even own the patent rights and can't allow for competition for replacement parts etc. It's insane, our defense budget is so out of wack it needs a complete overhaul.
While I was definitely a proponent of this, I will easily admit that I was a bit surprised that he actually did it. There are far too many "non-starters" for both parties right now, and it seems to be getting worse not better. Even identifying as a moderate or centrist is pretty well derided at every turn. It is a bit crazy, but the most heated arguments I get into are with people that I agree 80% or more with.
I am sure that the fiscally conservative Republicans are just as frustrated by this issue as you and I are. Over and over we hear the talk and then they come back with even more spending and less taxes, which is definitely the opposite of what is needed. The problem I see, is that I can't even remember the last time I heard a Democrat in office pushing for a balanced budget. I am not sure what is worse, not mentioning it or talking about it then doing the opposite; probably the latter but clearly not everyone agrees.
The worst thing in all this, is that we have some how taken on all this excess debt during during a virtual golden age. It is a bit scary to think about what the future would look like if we had a long-term recession.
I fully agree that this is an issue, and with most of your related points, but I really don't have any kind of a solution for it. The idea of creating or propping up an additional military company indefinitely frustrates me even when just thinking about it.
I keep teetering on an isolationist bent, where we would pull back from a lot of our military bases and make it clear that some old commitments are about to be updated, but I think it is pretty clear that some of our world adversaries would take that as a sign of weakness and start pushing their boundaries immediately.
I think it is time that some of our allies that rely on our military take on some of their own responsibility, but most of them are nowhere near ready. Also, I am pretty sure it will just create more world level chaos and likely lead to a new great war.
I think we likely have gotten ourselves into a bit of a pickle. Doubly so, since we are having such a cultural and political division issue at home. When its nearly impossible to handle simple issues, deeply complex issues like these are almost laughable, in the Joaquin Phoenix as Joker kind of way.