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
We need to get rid of riders... Someone propose a "one bill-one item" rule already, and stick that motherfucker on every single fucking bill as a rider until something comes along that'll bait em all into that shit.
perhaps, but combining bills does allow for good ways of compromise… i’ll pass your bill that i don’t agree with if you pass a change to this other thing that addresses my concerns, etc
Quid pro quo
Politics
Obama did something like that. It didn't work. All the little add ons are so each politician in a contested district can get something for their voters to justify all the other parts of the bill their voters don't like. Without that nothing ever gets passed.
"We tried" and then go on recess for 6 weeks
What if I told you that slime ball Matt Gaetz has already proposed this issue multiple times. Not sure how I feel about that but it’s the only sane thing I’ve heard from his side.
Because it would cause gridlock. That's why Gaetz wants to do it. There are too many things to pass one at a time. There are not enough affirmative votes on most single issues to pass anything. You need the little extra things to pull in the politicians who would otherwise not vote for that one thing because their local base doesn't want it.
Yeah I don’t really support that implementation. The single topic vote causes problems. Not every senator needs to be well informed on every single issue they vote for. That’s what committees are for. And what the rest of the party is for.
Don't know a single thing about Matt Gaetz, and Google suggests I really wouldn't care to :)
I'm a moderate, a (GASP!) Jordan Peterson type. Gaetz sounds partisan enough that I wouldn't listen to him for more than about 15 seconds, but I gotta qualify that remark by saying I'm not really part of his opposition either, because not choosing a side is basically not a thing anymore and I do it anyway ;)
I’m registered as an independent, and am not a fan of how political parties lead people to bundle opinions together. However, if you insist on not “taking a side” in today’s political climate, you either aren’t paying attention or you’re in denial that you prefer the bad guys. If you don’t know anything about Matt Gaetz, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re the former.
This independent’s “side” for the foreseeable future is whoever has the highest likelihood of beating their Republican opponent.
I don't think "moderate" means what you think it means.
And like that you've broken the biggest tool legislators have to negotiate marginal votes into their camp
So, you propose single issue voting in congress?
I'd like to propose a clean energy spending rider to your proposal of single issue voting.