The General US Politics Thread

Speaking of which, I got invited to a rally to protest and get the state senators to vote no. Giving what state it is, it's doubtful it'll do any good, but I might go anyway.

@Marq, I mean the US already stands alone with Somalia when it comes to the UN Declaration on the Rights of the Child....

@marq: Nicaragua originally didn't join because they had found the agreement to be too lax already.

edited 21st Sep '17 5:37:00 PM by Eschaton

Fruitpork: What’s the status on the aca repeal efforts? Last I heard they were trying to get either murkowski or Collins on board

They're trying to get Murkowski on board by removing any spending cap on Healthcare for Alaska (as well as Hawaii and Montana), otherwise Alaska would be one of the Republican-leaning states to be penalized with this Cassidy-Graham Bill. Another Senator (I can't find the link, or who it was that said it, but it's not any of the 4 major figures) is complaining about the fact that they're voting on the Bill before it has a CBO score.

There's also one final problem; the Bill might fail to meet Reconciliation Rules, especially because it comes packed with Insurance Requirement Waivers and Planned Parenthood defunding. Without these Amendments, the bill would fail in the Senate like AHCA. With these Amendments, the Graham-Cassidy Bill can be filibustered.

I’m worried.

We can tell.

x4 In short, the US actually helped draft the thing (alot), but no president has ever submitted it to the Senate. The Other Wiki has an article on it.

There's also this from The Economist.

edited 21st Sep '17 5:49:33 PM by CenturyEye

I heard that homeschooling advocates ruined it, but I'm not sure how true that story is.

Well, Republican Representative Tom Reed doesn't seem to think it will pass the Senate, according this MSNBC interview I'm watching right now. Though his reasoning seems to be that it will specifically be because of the partisan approach being used. He doesn't seem to like it himself.

And now Senator Murphy is up, and he's basically saying "Yeah, it's one vote away."

edited 21st Sep '17 5:56:33 PM by AceofSpades

Sent you a PM Fox.

EDIT: Also I kinda forgot to mention this and just sort of left it implicit, but I'm straight for the record.

edited 21st Sep '17 6:05:59 PM by Draghinazzo

Somewhat regarding fox's request for P Ms...

Is it bad that I only truly became liberal in my views late in high school?

Uh, no? We don't come into politics with a fully formed ideology in our heads. That kind of thing takes time to develop.

Eh-I grew in a conservative area, and did not really get a good look at the world until I was in college.

@Fox: speaking of, I wrote out my own experiences a couple of months back in this thread, which you can use for your essay. I will see if I can dig up a link later.

x3 No. It was the same way with me.

Edit:

edited 21st Sep '17 6:31:39 PM by IFwanderer

I leaned liberal for most of my adolescence as I guess partly a rebellion against my right-wing leaning household, but I only really began to understand social justice issues about race and gender in the last 3 years or so.

@ IFWanderer: Nice straw man. Again, I don't hate Sanders, in fact I usually support him and his ideas. I just think, again, that the timing on this was very bad. I mean, if it's not going to get passed anyway due to the lack of overall support in the Senate, why not wait two weeks until you know for sure that the Republicans can't try to repeal the ACA any more? Personally I think it should have waited until after 2018, for if there is a Blue Wave, but if it's going to be put up sooner (to gauge support and work on developing details on how it would be set up and paid for), at least wait until it's not going to give cover or support to the Republicans. I don't think anyone is saying the G-C Bill exists solely because of Medicare for All (for one thing, there was talk of it right after the last repeal failed), just that it certainly didn't help and may have given it more of a nudge. Senator Harris is one of my senators, and I absolutely am glad she supported the bill too (mostly because I know she's smart and knowledgeable enough to craft it into workable legislation). I just wish they hadn't jumped the gun and waited just a bit longer.

And I also mentioned before the same thing Capsase did, that as much we were glad Pelosi and Schumer's deal with Trump may have saved DACA and put off the budget/debt ceiling until a later point when the Republicans would have far less bargaining power, that too opened up time in the Senate for this new repeal bill that otherwise wouldn't have been there. It feels like the Democratic base has been so desperate for pushback against Trump, and clamoring for our representatives to do more, that they responded by acting too quickly or without proper thought for all the consequences. There's so much terrible stuff going on it's understandable to want something done now, and this is hardly the time for incrementalism, but at the same time patience and wisdom do more in making sure you do the right thing at the right time for the maximum value. It's the same reason people keep saying we need to let Mueller do his work, so he does everything right and can nail Trump and everyone else in this corrupt regime.

Basically, as good as both the deal and Medicare for All are, I'm very much afraid we may have shot ourselves in the foot, unless something else very positive happens soon to offset this unintended fallout. Even if nothing else happens, this repeal passing would be a disaster by itself.

On that note, one thing to hope for when it comes to Murkowski: she was the one who, when she came out as a 'no', was not only harassed by Trump and some of her fellow Senators, but also had Zinke threatening to cut off government funding to Alaska (I forget what it was for) unless she voted yes. Zinke was censured for that and supposed to be investigated but I never heard what came of it (I'm guessing it was quietly dropped, damn it...). So on the one hand, I doubt she's going to forget that. On the other hand, it may be that she's not publicly stating her vote to avoid being attacked again in the same manner, and waiting till the day of the vote if there is one to vote no and face any blowback then.

edited 21st Sep '17 6:45:07 PM by Ingonyama

What did I do here?

EDIT: NVM, I think I found what you're talking about. I wasn't talking about you in particular, I was talking about the rest of the thread there.

edited 21st Sep '17 6:40:24 PM by IFwanderer

Several pages back, when you were calling the discussion of Medicare for All's timing as more Sanders hate.

EDIT: Okay, thanks for saying that. I just wanted it clear that I don't hate Sanders, and I don't think being concerned about timing and what it may have given the Republicans in support or something to rail against is the same thing. We can criticize decisions Sanders (and other Democrats) make without it meaning we hate them and want them gone. If that deal Pelosi and Schumer made also helped contribute to this, I'll be upset (and again suggest this could have been the downside to it people were wondering about at the time), but I still think they're both great politicians and Congresspeople and don't want them gone either.

edited 21st Sep '17 6:43:45 PM by Ingonyama

Yeah, I get what you're saying (and, hell, I don't like Sanders anymore at this point) it's just that the thread has so many people taking shots at Sanders whenever he's relevant I'm kind of getting bored of it, especially when it drowns new topics that we don't discuss every other week and he's getting attacked for things there's no way he could reasonably have predicted, hating on him for presenting that healthcare bill is kind of like the idiots all around the net that start screaming bloody murder any time Hillary gives her opinions on the election.

@Tactical Fox 88: Sent you (a goddamn gigantic, sorry about that) PM. In case of any further clarification needed, just PM me back.

edited 21st Sep '17 6:58:53 PM by Gaon

@Ace: I ask because I originally supported Sanders in the primaries, and as anyone here would know, I used to defend him a lot, no matter what.

x3: I get what you're saying too. And considering I supported Sanders and to some degree still do, you can imagine what it was like for me reading all that! (Not that I didn't find nuggets of truth in it, or have my mind changed on some issues.)

I guess what I was trying to say was less about Sanders himself and more the overall political situation in Congress. That it was me wondering/worrying whether certain choices and decisions, as otherwise laudable as they were or seemed to be, might have made things worse for us. Not that I am attacking Democrats either. More of a stepping back in a big picture sense, thinking that some politicians, as well-meaning and good-hearted as they may be, could have undercut our cause without intending to. I hope that's not the case, but if it is, I am wondering then what can possibly be done next to try and recover from it.

And yes, I absolutely want to talk about/see other new things. Problem is right now, the big things are the ACA repeal and Puerto Rico, neither of which is looking very good. (My boyfriend and I have a very good friend/family there, respectively, so...)

edited 21st Sep '17 10:38:43 PM by Ingonyama

This whole debacle has really confirmed just how much of a bogeyman socialism still is to a good chunk of the USA.

Double post for slight topic shift:

Not sure if someone else brought this up, but...

Price traveled by private plane at least 24 times

The last bit is darkly amusing:

And here I thought Republicans were the party of fiscal conservatism.

edited 21st Sep '17 11:11:23 PM by M84