TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

Nov 2023 Mod notice:


There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.

If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines before posting here.

Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.

If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules when posting here.


In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.

Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#40576: Nov 15th 2012 at 6:48:20 PM

States can't ignore federal law. They can, however, create more restrictive laws.

A state could say "the legal age limit for drinking is 25" basically, but not "18"

This is technically true due to the Supremacy Clause, though a state can defy federal law so long as the federal side doesn't choose to gripe about it. I mean somehow, california has this sanctuary city bullshit, which is against federal law.

And Colorado just legalized weed, so stuff like this happens.

DrunkGirlfriend from Castle Geekhaven Since: Jan, 2011
#40577: Nov 15th 2012 at 6:49:37 PM

Actually, the drinking age isn't a federal law at all. tongue

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
Kostya (Unlucky Thirteen)
#40578: Nov 15th 2012 at 6:50:56 PM

[up]Technically it was a mandate. According to my school the government basically threatened to remove highway funding if the states didn't change the age to 21.

DrunkGirlfriend from Castle Geekhaven Since: Jan, 2011
#40579: Nov 15th 2012 at 6:52:25 PM

[up] Yeah. The states are technically allowed to set their drinking age at whatever they want, but if it's less than 21, they get a 10% decrease in highway funding.

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian
TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#40580: Nov 15th 2012 at 7:02:30 PM

Barkey: You'll note that the governor has said "It's still illegally federally, so I can't exactly tell you all to get high." It just depends on how much the Feds enforce federal law when it contradicts state law.

Barkey Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: [TOP SECRET]
#40581: Nov 15th 2012 at 7:19:14 PM

Exactly, it's in clear opposition, but the feds lack the ability to enforce it at a local level, because that's what the state law enforcement is for. The only places with considerable federal coverage are places like military bases and areas with a lot of federal agents working in the area, and it isn't their job to do shit like that.

So essentially, unless it really gives the federal side a huge boner to shut it down, states can do what they want when it comes to rights. At least until the federal side mumbles supremacy clause and forces them to stop.

edited 15th Nov '12 7:19:37 PM by Barkey

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#40582: Nov 15th 2012 at 7:51:49 PM

So how likely are they to really push Texas and other states to enforce the healthcare mandate? Because after all the Supreme Court folderol, it seems like this would be something they'd want to make damn sure is enforced. Otherwise all that struggle was pretty much worthless.

Anyway, like I said, Dems need better candidates. And we've got some good ones at the Senate level now. It's just Republicans have had a stranglehold so long, and it's structured in such a way as anyone not favored by the establishment (this includes other Republicans) can't get in. There's more too it but the article I read about it was... quite some time ago, actually. Back when Friedman ran. Well, we got two years now, and some Democrats won seats this time. Who knows.

Joesolo Indiana Solo Since: Dec, 2010 Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Indiana Solo
#40583: Nov 15th 2012 at 7:53:30 PM

@kost- both really.

I'm baaaaaaack
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#40584: Nov 15th 2012 at 9:14:46 PM

@federal enforcement: The feds can't make Washington and Colorado make pot arrests. They can set up DEA task forces to do it themselves, and send pot smokers to federal prison for it, but they can't expect any help from the local fuzz. Alaska's been that way for a while, and the feds have essentially given up trying.

It's the same with the sanctuary cities. They're not in violation of any law; the city can still order its police to simply not check immigration status or talk to the INS, leaving everything up to the INS to handle with their own money and personnel. As the feds don't have command authority over the municipal governments, there's nothing they can do (though several bills have been tossed around to cut federal funding to said cities).

edited 15th Nov '12 9:25:31 PM by Ramidel

Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#40585: Nov 15th 2012 at 9:43:07 PM

Huh, that's weird. I thought the federal government was forbidden from controlling alcohol, due to 21st amendment.

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#40586: Nov 15th 2012 at 9:47:26 PM

All that did was end the Prohibition era. It didn't say the government no longer had control over things like drinking age. It's been twenty one for a while now. And it's been changed a few times since that amendment, too.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#40587: Nov 15th 2012 at 9:49:51 PM

They're not "controlling alcohol," in this case. They're using the power to distribute federal funds to coerce the states into banning underage drinking for them. If, for example, Alaska decided that we wanted to host the annual Babies 'n Beer festival, we could do that, but the feds would reduce the road funds that we get.

I don't think any states do that on alcohol, but I know that on other issues states have done just that; "keep your damn money, we'll do it our way."

edited 15th Nov '12 9:51:20 PM by Ramidel

Trivialis Since: Oct, 2011
#40588: Nov 15th 2012 at 9:50:35 PM

It didn't say the government no longer had control over things like drinking age.

Yes it did. Section 2 explicitly says that "alcohol use in violation of state law is forbidden." That means states have jurisdiction over alcohol.

Furthermore, NFIB v. Sebelius ruling struck down Congress's attempts to threaten states (in this case by withholding Medicaid funding for states not expanding medicaid). Using that as a precedent, it would be possible for a state to create its own drinking age law, and sue the US if it tries to withhold local funding.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#40589: Nov 15th 2012 at 10:03:25 PM

Sebelius is of dubious precedential value. The Medicaid provision was severed and struck, but the justices couldn't agree on why they were striking it.

TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#40590: Nov 15th 2012 at 10:12:42 PM

There's a distinction between the feds being unable to have LESS restrictive laws than the states, and the feds being unable to have MORE restrictive laws than the states.

Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#40591: Nov 15th 2012 at 10:15:39 PM

@Tomu: Huh?

The Feds can have whatever laws they like (subject to the limits of the Constitution). The states can have whatever laws they like (ditto). When the two directly conflict (which is actually pretty rare), the federal law takes precedence.

But in the case of drinking age, it's not a Supremacy Clause issue. The Feds aren't mandating a drinking age, they're twisting the States' arms.

edited 15th Nov '12 10:16:06 PM by Ramidel

TheyCallMeTomu Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
#40592: Nov 15th 2012 at 10:21:21 PM

Take minimum wage for instance. State minimum wage can be ABOVE the Federal minimum wage, but not beneath.

DeviantBraeburn Wandering Jew from Dysfunctional California Since: Aug, 2012
Wandering Jew
#40593: Nov 15th 2012 at 10:26:29 PM

So when does the Republican governors' gathering happen?

Also Dems pick up another seat in House.

There are still 4 House Races still going on.tongue

edited 15th Nov '12 10:29:37 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016
Ramidel Since: Jan, 2001
#40594: Nov 15th 2012 at 10:29:29 PM

@Tomu: In effect, yes. However, as a technical matter, the state can set whatever minimum wage they like; if it's nonexistent, or lower than federal, then the onus is on the Feds to enforce it, while if it's higher, then the onus is on the state to enforce the law.

I'll concede that, in the case of minimum wage, this is a distinction without a difference, but in other areas it can be rather important.

Serocco Serocco from Miami, Florida Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
Serocco
#40595: Nov 16th 2012 at 1:03:11 AM

Attacks and retaliations between Israel and Hamas are escalating, causing more deaths of civilians and children, primarily Palestinians.

One of Netanyahu's advisers said "We're not talking about a ceasefire. It's not on the agenda". America, predictably, is supporting Israel. It feels like Netanyahu wants war with Palestine since he's not getting one with Iran.

edited 16th Nov '12 1:04:30 AM by Serocco

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#40596: Nov 16th 2012 at 1:07:11 AM

^

Isn't there an Israel thread somewhere? And I suspect it's more related to the very turbulent internal Israeli Political situation...

Keep Rolling On
Serocco Serocco from Miami, Florida Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
Serocco
#40597: Nov 16th 2012 at 1:07:34 AM

A bloodied Israeli infant in a pink jumpsuit was gingerly rescued from the rubble of an apartment building where three other residents were killed by a rocket fired from Gaza. The three deaths in Kiryat Malachi were the first on the Israeli side.

At the same time, bereaved young parents to the south in Gaza City buried their once-cheerful 11-month-old boy, who had just learned to say "Mama." The boy, Omar Misharawi, was killed Wednesday in an Israeli attack. The explosion tore through the family's home, killing him and his pregnant aunt as the family dived for cover.

And yet, the Americans are only backing Israel, because the Israelis have a lobby in America. Yet another reason why money's influence within politics needs to end.

edited 16th Nov '12 1:10:10 AM by Serocco

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
Serocco Serocco from Miami, Florida Since: Mar, 2010 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
Serocco
#40599: Nov 16th 2012 at 1:14:19 AM

I see no Israel threads regarding the Gaza Strip that aren't locked already.tongue

The President is handing the queen over to the Republicans by appearing wishy-washy on the income rates.

edited 16th Nov '12 1:19:09 AM by Serocco

In RWBY, every girl is Best Girl.
Greenmantle V from Greater Wessex, Britannia Since: Feb, 2010 Relationship Status: Hiding
V
#40600: Nov 16th 2012 at 1:20:08 AM

How about Israel in General? Read the article about the Israeli Parliament, the Knesset*

edited 16th Nov '12 1:24:39 AM by Greenmantle

Keep Rolling On

Total posts: 417,856
Top