this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
158 points (96.5% liked)
politics
18821 readers
4914 users here now
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.
- 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.
- 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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
About time tuber gets investigated as a potential agent of a foreign power. This crap impacts the US ability to defend its interests.
Look, we all know Coach doesn't give a rats ass about the military, and is just grandstanding. You can tell he doesn't take his job seriously because everyone calls him "Coach", not "Senator". It's like it's all a game to him.
But I'm sick of hearing about Senate rules and traditions like they're etched in stone. Mitch certainly didn't care when he made up one rule when the other guy was President, then a totally different rule when his guy was. Chuck needs to grow a pair and fix the rules that permit one Coach to sabotage our military readiness.
Yes, but the Democrats are not in control of the Senate. They hold the leadership role, but there are only 48 Democrats. There are three independents which caucus with them, and only two of those are liberal. The lynchpin is still Manchin who, while a Democrat by party affiliation, is a moderate Republican in nearly all facets of belief. That leaves just 49 votes likely to be counted on in a party-line vote, which is not enough to allow Harris to cast a 50-50 tie-breaker. Add in that California's Feinstein is so addled that she doesn't realize she is actively harming the party and her constituents by being an absentee lawmaker - mentally, even when (rarely) physically present - and the control available to advance rule changes are non-existent. If it weren't for Manchin and Sinema in 2021, they could have added both DC and PR as he 51st and 52nd states (both have formally requested admission by vote in the past, iirc), pushing the number of D senators into a solid majority. Those two would not allow that because it would have eliminated their power over the Senate leaders.
If it weren't for Manchin and Sinema in 2021, they could have added both DC and PR as he 51st and 52nd states
AFAIK, fillibuster applies. So you actually need 60 votes to really do anything controversial (with a handful of exceptions). So no, having those two people wouldn't have made a difference. We'd need 10 half decent republicans and those don't exist.
IMO the blame needs to be correctly focused. As awful as they are, bad things aren't happening because of 2 senators who were elected as Democrats (but don't vote like them). The bad things happen because of the many, many republican senators who almost consistently refuse to vote for morally right bills.
Like, there's no good reason for PR and DC to not be states. Except for the fact that they'd both lean Democrat, so the GOP cannot allow it. They care only about winning, not democracy.
One of those two Independants is Bernie Sanders, whose record is well known. The other is Angus King, who considers himself a "moderate", but his voting record shows he's somewhat sane and would probably not hold up a rule change like this. Chuck has 50 votes if he presses it.
Imagine spending your life in the military only to be used as a political pawn.
Is that sarcasm? Because the military has always been a pawn of politics.
Yes. Yes it is.
I shall consider myself wooshed then.
You can never be too careful.
Thanks, mate.
It's insane that one Senator has that much power and Tuberville is a unqualified, moron but ultimately I don't see this being a huge issue for the military. They will simply have those people fill those slots without the requisite rank or have another GO cover down and do that job. A good chuck are probably positions created solely so they can have a place to put those GOs anyway.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Pentagon says there are 301 generals and admirals whose nominations have been placed in limbo because of an indefinite "hold" by Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a Republican from Alabama, who wants the military to change its policy of reimbursing servicemembers for travel to get reproductive care, including abortions.
"The Department has 83 three- and four-star nominations pending for positions already vacated or due to rotate within the next 150 days," the Pentagon said in response to questions by reporters.
The Pentagon says a "small number" of servicemembers are getting reimbursed for trips to get reproductive care, which includes travel for in vitro fertilization, but have yet to come up with any details.
"The senator from Alabama has chosen a profoundly insulting and damaging path to make his unhappiness known," said Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee.
"I warned the Pentagon that I would hold their most senior nominees if they broke the law," Tuberville said in a statement, first reported this week by Breitbart News.
The hope among officials is that Tuberville will at least allow some nominations to go forward for a vote when the Senate returns in September – specifically for the incoming chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who serves as the top military adviser to the president.
The original article contains 731 words, the summary contains 220 words. Saved 70%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Wow what a piece of shit.