|
Charliegrs posted:If and when the debt ceiling bill gets passed and we avoid a default is there anything stopping Biden from then immediately invoking the 14th amendment to end this nonsense once and for all? The argument against using it right now is that it would end up in the supreme court and then we would default while they debate it and possibly strike it down. But if this were to happen after a debt ceiling bill is passed, then the supreme court could debate it without the danger of a default. I mean unless they debated it for a few years. No, because the Republicans will pinky-swear to not do this again and the Dems will say that's good enough for them before taking a nice long sip of water.
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
I’m confused, are Dems hapless dupes getting Lucy Footballed by the devious Republicans, or complicit agents taking advantage of the debt ceiling to secretly enact their conservative fiscal agenda? 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 06:43
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:I’m confused, are Dems hapless dupes getting Lucy Footballed by the devious Republicans, or complicit agents taking advantage of the debt ceiling to secretly enact their conservative fiscal agenda? Their behavior is consistent with either theory and since generally it's impossible to know the intentions of another person in their heart of hearts, different people have diffrent theories into why they behave as they do.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 06:47
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:Are there any that are realistically feasible given our current reality? I'm not trying to be glib, I just don't think anything that exists would fly today. The things the Supreme Court is doing that we're mad about mostly fall into three categories:
All three of those things could easily be addressed by Congress, if it were functional enough to be more assertive. The first two items could be directly overturned by Congress passing updated laws that address whatever the Court thought was unclear, and the third could be dealt with by Congress passing laws to affirm those rights and doctrines. And if the Court jerks Congress around too much, then Congress does have the option to do things like court-packing. Charliegrs posted:If and when the debt ceiling bill gets passed and we avoid a default is there anything stopping Biden from then immediately invoking the 14th amendment to end this nonsense once and for all? The argument against using it right now is that it would end up in the supreme court and then we would default while they debate it and possibly strike it down. But if this were to happen after a debt ceiling bill is passed, then the supreme court could debate it without the danger of a default. I mean unless they debated it for a few years. The 14th Amendment isn't a magic spell that Biden can just chant whenever. The only way to "invoke" it is to cite it as justification for paying debt that isn't authorized by Congress. Or, in plain English, the only way to "invoke" it is to exceed the debt ceiling. There's nothing to bring to the Supreme Court until then.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 06:48
|
|
|
RoboChrist 9000 posted:Their behavior is consistent with either theory and since generally it's impossible to know the intentions of another person in their heart of hearts, different people have diffrent theories into why they behave as they do. They can be compliant AND stupid.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 07:10
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:A lot of these rumors have proven true lately. Yes, because 'hearing some rumors' is Capitol Hil reporting lingo for 'someone told me off the record and I am protecting my source for access'.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 10:48
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:
This is why I am pro coin, the coin can just be minted ahead of time and someone is then welcome to try to sue over it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 11:27
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The first two items could be directly overturned by Congress passing updated laws that address whatever the Court thought was unclear, and the third could be dealt with by Congress passing laws to affirm those rights and doctrines. That implies that you think the Supreme Court is acting in good faith and just making rulings based on "unclear law," and not inventing ridiculous excuses that serve their radical political agenda, and that the Supreme Court would not just take that updated law and pass it through their "major questions" doctrine to find brand new excuses. That's plainly bullshit.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 12:25
|
|
|
The SupCt has also gone out of its way to overturn clearly understood and Congressionally passed laws esp in regards to voting, bribery and thw environment.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 13:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:All three of those things could easily be addressed by Congress, if it were functional enough to be more assertive. The first two items could be directly overturned by Congress passing updated laws that address whatever the Court thought was unclear, and the third could be dealt with by Congress passing laws to affirm those rights and doctrines. And if the Court jerks Congress around too much, then Congress does have the option to do things like court-packing. Respectfully, the bolded part is why I asked if any of the checks on the supreme court were feasible. Congress isn't functional or assertive. The ways to make it functional and assertive are to either elect enough people who are actually interested in changing the way the system works to have 60 people willing to sign on (in practice the number here is probably higher because people like Manchin and Sinema exist). Or, to elect enough people to overturn the filibuster such that 50+tie breaker is enough. And frankly that seems like it's probably the same number, if not higher. The senate is structured in such a way that team blue ever obtaining that kind of majority is basically unattainable, and there aren't enough states who support the radical changes necessary to alleviate some of our problems to ensure that even if they did, it's extremely likely that a lot of them would be very conservative and reject the notion outright. Again, see Manchin and Sinema. I may be overstating my opinion here, but in the near future barring illegal things, there isn't really a way for the system to self-correct the supreme court's untouchability and flagrant ideological biases.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 13:52
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:Respectfully, the bolded part is why I asked if any of the checks on the supreme court were feasible. There is one theory that Congress can limit what the Supreme Court can hear (outside of original jurisdiction) so in theory you can pass a law and cut the court out. But there is something to be said that can abused pretty easily.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 13:57
|
|
|
Widespread respect for the Supreme Court as an institution is its only real protection from partisan kneecapping by whoever controls Congress or from ''good luck enforcing that' by the Executive. Which is why their current course is so fuckin stupid. unless you want to destroy civic trust in government and don't give a poo poo so win/win for republicans i guess.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 14:18
|
|
|
The SupCt will continue to do whatever the gently caress it wants because it's enforcing Republican doctrine and the Dems don't particularly give a poo poo about it?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Why wasn't the debt ceiling passed when the Dems had the House last year? Because they wanted to negotiate cuts.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 16:49
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/jstein_wapo/status/1662952577548386304?s=46&t=o307xxBiew2hWqLPw2eCl Extra work requirements is what Biden wanted lmao
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 16:51
|
|
|
Honestly, this deal is such a major victory for Biden that I don't see how the GOP freaks in Congress don't try to scuttle it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:14
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Honestly, this deal is such a major victory for Biden that I don't see how the GOP freaks in Congress don't try to scuttle it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
That is unquestionably a huge victory in Biden's eyes yeah
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
I mean, the economy is potentially not going to implode and McCarthy only got a slim fraction of what he was demanding, so in this case it's a "win" for Biden. It still hasn't passed yet and it's still up to the crazies to not scuttle the deal and vote McCarthy out.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
Gentle reminder that McCarty wanted a 20% cut across most government programs. All he got was a five year increase to the work requirement age bracket of SNAP for some groups (that might very well be canceled out by the fact that the definition of "homeless" has been drastically expanded to include anyone with unstable living conditions), and cuts to IRS funding (that won't affect anything in the short term).
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:28
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Gentle reminder that McCarty wanted a 20% cut across most government programs. All he got was a five year increase to the work requirement age bracket of SNAP (that might very well be canceled out by the fact that the definition of "homeless" has been drastically expanded to include anyone with unstable living conditions), and cuts to IRS funding (that won't affect anything in the short term). From all the news I'm seeing, he's also getting student loans unpaused, which I have to imagine is a huge deal.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:30
|
|
|
KillHour posted:From all the news I'm seeing, he's also getting student loans unpaused, which I have to imagine is a huge deal. They just codified the already announced plan. They were going to voluntarily end the pause on September 1st, but now they are codifying that the pause ends on September 1st.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:35
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:They just codified the already announced plan. They were going to voluntarily end the pause on September 1st, but now they are codifying that the pause ends on September 1st. So the Dems were already planning on doing the stupid thing with no arm-twisting required. Got it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
KillHour posted:So the Dems were already planning on doing the stupid thing with no arm-twisting required. Got it. I mean, we live in a country with two far right parties, is it really a surprise?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:They just codified the already announced plan. They were going to voluntarily end the pause on September 1st, but now they are codifying that the pause ends on September 1st. I did not believe the administration would end the pause on any date, and would continue to kick the can down the road.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
It's a win for Biden... you can even make an argument with an almost-straight face that he actually didn't negotiate over the debt ceiling. This clears up the next two opportunities the 118th House would've had to threaten government shutdowns over budgets (one in the middle of the campaign), and gives them no more opportunities to use the debt ceiling. So what did Biden give up for that? He has said all along that he was willing to negotiate about the budget. In making this debt ceiling deal, he also made a budget deal that stands on its own accord - if Republicans had been threatening a shutdown in September and Biden managed to get out of it with this level of damage, I think I would've been disappointed but understood. It's really hosed up that the bill screws over a modest amount of, essentially, random poor people, who fall into an extremely arbitrary category, for no real reason. But from a budget impact standpoint, it's a really good result for '24-'25 with a Republican-controlled house. It's hard to get through a session with a Republican speaker without cutting some domestic spending. (Well, unless a Republican is president, of course.) KillHour posted:From all the news I'm seeing, he's also getting student loans unpaused, which I have to imagine is a huge deal. It's gross to think in political terms when you're talking about people's ability to support themselves, but in a certain sense, the fact that payments will have resumed will increase the political salience of the SCOTUS (almost certainly) striking down the forgiveness next year. Right now my federal debt feels pretty... theoretical. I haven't paid it in three years. If I continued to never pay it, that would be nice, but I wouldn't feel an immediate impact from it going away. But I think it would be a much bigger deal to people, psychologically, if they had a major monthly expense that could've gone away, but didn't, because Republicans. Gerund posted:I did not believe the administration would end the pause on any date, and would continue to kick the can down the road.  and I'm disappointed but not surprised they gave it up in this context.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:45
|
|
|
KillHour posted:So the Dems were already planning on doing the stupid thing with no arm-twisting required. Got it. This was known months ago during the last pause extension announcement, it’s not exactly a new surprise? I guess it’s something you might not have to pay attention to if you’re lucky enough to not have student loans to pay though.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
Kalit posted:This was known months ago during the last pause extension announcement, it’s not exactly a new surprise? I guess it’s something you might not have to pay attention to if you’re lucky enough to not have student loans to pay though.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:47
|
|
|
Kalit posted:This was known months ago during the last pause extension announcement, it’s not exactly a new surprise? I guess it’s something you might not have to pay attention to if you’re lucky enough to not have student loans to pay though. It's a terrible move. For one thing, most people aren't clued into the ongoings of politics, so for a lot of people they're going to get the news "hey, those student loans you've been free from are going to be a monthly mandatory non-discharegable debt again starting like, right now." That, followed swiftly by a potential ruling by the supreme court that "actually it was never paused and you now owe this back pay plus 3 years of interest on your debt." It would be great if that second part doesn't happen, but considering the one shared ideal by all parties in power is that we must needs feed capital at all costs, I'm very hesistant to assume this little push for backpay fails. But ultimately putting student loans on pause and then unpausing them is something that every single person who benefited from it is going to hate -- and they'll all correctly blame the president for doing it.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:Gentle reminder that McCarty wanted a 20% cut across most government programs. All he got was a five year increase to the work requirement age bracket of SNAP for some groups (that might very well be canceled out by the fact that the definition of "homeless" has been drastically expanded to include anyone with unstable living conditions), and cuts to IRS funding (that won't affect anything in the short term). 50-55 year olds who are not homeless or disabled already but also are not working is a very very narrow field that is also getting into the prioritize help towards from social safety net organizations area of age. Generally they live with their parents because they are often adult children (i've worked with a few) who are often trying to get on (and qualify for) disability, but getting on disability in the first place is hard. Mellow Seas posted:Well, it's a bit of a surprise that it's actually happening, they've announced dates where the pause would end a half dozen times before. This is the first time they haven't had the option to back out. I'm hoping the supreme court doesn't rule against the executive order (they probably will, and I honestly don't have a lot of loans left, but still it would be great to have the little bit I have left over wiped off the plate)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
Kalit posted:This was known months ago during the last pause extension announcement, it’s not exactly a new surprise? I guess it’s something you might not have to pay attention to if you’re lucky enough to not have student loans to pay though. If anything this should be used as a reminder for folks where the alleged rapist president stands as well as his party/supporters. This agreement basically benefits the wealthy and the military industrial complex while performing a shotgun blast to the underprivileged and the middle class.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
I’m really not optimistic about the student loan forgiveness case You would think that SCOTUS could give people one thing while they make Affirmative Action unconstitutional and whatever awful stuff is coming this month
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
I think the lesson we've learned here is that it's perfectly acceptable to bring the economy to the brink of ruin in the hopes of obtaining incredibly miniscule concessions. Lol if anyone takes the US economy seriously ever again knowing that it can collapse at any time cause some old ghouls are holding out for a small evil edit to SNAP. Looking forward to them edging closer and closer to the collapse every time the debt ceiling comes up going forward in exchange for a pipeline or kickbacks to their state.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
Ershalim posted:It's a terrible move. For one thing, most people aren't clued into the ongoings of politics, so for a lot of people they're going to get the news "hey, those student loans you've been free from are going to be a monthly mandatory non-discharegable debt again starting like, right now." That, followed swiftly by a potential ruling by the supreme court that "actually it was never paused and you now owe this back pay plus 3 years of interest on your debt." It might be the final straw that actually causes a decent recession, which of course the Democrats will (rightfully) be blamed for. Edit: Zeron posted:I think the lesson we've learned here is that it's perfectly acceptable to bring the economy to the brink of ruin in the hopes of obtaining incredibly miniscule concessions. Lol if anyone takes the US economy seriously ever again knowing that it can collapse at any time cause some old ghouls are holding out for a small evil edit to SNAP. Looking forward to them edging closer and closer to the collapse every time the debt ceiling comes up going forward in exchange for a pipeline or kickbacks to their state. This is why the push to actually switch to an alternate reserve currency is gaining significant steam; I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there's a new primary reserve currency within the next 10-15 years.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:In that Biden wanted to display fiscal conservatism and bipartisanship by starving a bunch of poor people, yes. Major victory. Dark Bardon ftw. It's bad and dumb, but they aren't starving millions of people. ~54% of people in that age range who are on SNAP already meet the work requirements. Another ~24-27% meet the childcare exemption requirement. Some unknown amount meet the veteran/training/volunteering/education/disability/homeless exemption requirement. Just taking the two numbers that we know for sure, that means a maximum of about 0.14% of SNAP recipients would be impacted by it - even less depending on how many people meet the veteran/training/volunteering/education exemption requirement. It will most likely be between 0.05% to 0.1% when all is said and done. It sucks that some people are going to have to waste time attending a training class every month or get a part-time job. It is a dumb policy that just makes life more annoying for a small amount of people people for a very minor budgetary impact. It also eventually expires and people under 50 have already been subject to these same requirements for over 30 years. It's bad policy, but you need to know what specifically the policy changes are in order to assess what is happening. https://theconversation.com/gops-pr...ady-work-205960
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
Zeron posted:I think the lesson we've learned here is that it's perfectly acceptable to bring the economy to the brink of ruin in the hopes of obtaining incredibly miniscule concessions. Lol if anyone takes the US economy seriously ever again knowing that it can collapse at any time cause some old ghouls are holding out for a small evil edit to SNAP. Looking forward to them edging closer and closer to the collapse every time the debt ceiling comes up going forward in exchange for a pipeline or kickbacks to their state. If the Dems and their supporters did believe any of the rhetoric they spew during donation time, they would vote against this bill until their demands are met. It isn’t like the house couldn’t pass this bill without them if Rs voted in lock step so why vote to actively harm the less fortunate? Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's bad and dumb, but they aren't starving millions of people. Dems can starve some people as a treat, etc etc (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 17:59
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's bad and dumb, but they aren't starving millions of people. While you are correct, I would maintain that starving any additional people to death is, in fact, bad. We don't need to do that. We have more than enough resources and money and food and the knowledge of where basically all those who are food insecure live. Letting more people slip through the cracks is an unequivocable failing of the government.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 18:02
|
|
|
Yeah, the best and worst thing about the SNAP cuts is that they affect a vanishingly small number of people. The overall impact will be small but it's so petty. It's unlikely anybody will literally starve to death as a result of these cuts. But it will cause some people financial stress, increase strain on local support networks (family, food banks, etc) and generally cause people massive inconvenience. All for pretty much no reason. Zeron posted:Lol if anyone takes the US economy seriously ever again knowing that it can collapse at any time cause some old ghouls are holding out for a small evil edit to SNAP.  Another sense in which Biden "won" the deal is that there is definitely going to be more outrage on the right than on the left about it. Try to imagine it from their POV. McCarthy promised them a feast and got them a bag of M&M's. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 18:07 on May 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
this is exactly what joe biden wanted all along, which is why these cuts are happening during a cutthroat negotiation with a Republican-controlled house instead of at like, literally any other point. I bet he and the freedom caucus got together at epstein island and raised a glass of wine while toasting evil. c'mon posters.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:39 |
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Yeah, the best and worst thing about the SNAP cuts is that they affect a vanishingly small number of people. The overall impact will be small but it's so petty. That's the dumbest part though, that they waited until literally a week before the default to do it. It's not like there hasn't already been harm from waiting this long, all kinds of emergency measures have been activated and funds dried up. If they were going to make such a bog standard deal, it only looks even crazier that they waited to do so until they were literally staring collapse in the eyes.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2023 18:08
|
|