As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

The 117th United States [Congress]

1585961636498

Posts

  • Options
    Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Jesus fucking Christ why does the senate keep these asinine traditions

    Because there aren't enough Senators who want to change them. Because the Senate as an institution, many of the people included, are the worst. Just absolutely up their own asses about how great the Senate is.

    The only group of people that are as bad are sports franchise owners

  • Options
    zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    The only thing that blows my mind is that the Senate actually used to be even worse before the 17th Amendment.

    Like how could this be worse? How is this actually a country? God what a shitshow we are.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    This argument seems really flawed. What level of majority should be able to bypass having to actually vote on things? Because I'm pretty sure that's what unanimous consent does.

    People would be less annoyed if the solution was then "Ok we'll vote on it now" instead of the Senate having multiple long delays.

    This.

    It's bad enough Rand Paul is calling the shots, it's even worse he's doing performative congressional gymnastics to show off for his constituents on the bodies of Ukrainian citizens for his papa Putin.

  • Options
    daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    I go back and forth on which is the more asinine, destructive thing. The Senate or the Electoral College.

    The Senate is more asinine. The Electoral College is what it has been from the very beginning. It's shit, but it is what it always has been. The Senate started out shitty and actively has chosen over the years to become even shittier.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • Options
    MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    EDIT - Old Draft Header
    daveNYC wrote: »
    I go back and forth on which is the more asinine, destructive thing. The Senate or the Electoral College.

    The Senate is more asinine. The Electoral College is what it has been from the very beginning. It's shit, but it is what it always has been. The Senate started out shitty and actively has chosen over the years to become even shittier.

    Yup. The EC is what it is. Until there starts being a margin altering number of "faithless electors", it isn't close to comparable to the outright fuckery of what the Senate is, and what it's really always been.

    The fact that faithless electors could possibly be a thing, especially with the amount of money that gets thrown around at elections, is terrifying.

    Oh, bribery is against the law? Yeah, a Trump appointed Justice Department will get right on that.

    I know it's a long shot to happen, but the fact that it's possible, because of how the laws are, and what the States are trying to do, is very concerning with the upcoming midterms.

    MorganV on
  • Options
    hlprmnkyhlprmnky Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    This argument seems really flawed. What level of majority should be able to bypass having to actually vote on things? Because I'm pretty sure that's what unanimous consent does.

    People would be less annoyed if the solution was then "Ok we'll vote on it now" instead of the Senate having multiple long delays.

    This.

    It's bad enough Rand Paul is calling the shots, it's even worse he's doing performative congressional gymnastics to show off for his constituents on the bodies of Ukrainian citizens for his papa Putin.

    If any of his Democratic colleagues were up to it, I personally would love it if Paul was unable to speak on the Floor for the remainder of his term without the full allowance of time for debate used to read out the names and dates KIA of Ukrainian war dead who might reasonably have been saved by either medical aid delayed by this stunt, or not in combat that day due to superior firepower similarly delayed. That won’t happen, of course, because collegiality > consequences always and forever, but I would love to see it.

    _
    Your Ad Here! Reasonable Rates!
  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    hlprmnky wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    This argument seems really flawed. What level of majority should be able to bypass having to actually vote on things? Because I'm pretty sure that's what unanimous consent does.

    People would be less annoyed if the solution was then "Ok we'll vote on it now" instead of the Senate having multiple long delays.

    This.

    It's bad enough Rand Paul is calling the shots, it's even worse he's doing performative congressional gymnastics to show off for his constituents on the bodies of Ukrainian citizens for his papa Putin.

    If any of his Democratic colleagues were up to it, I personally would love it if Paul was unable to speak on the Floor for the remainder of his term without the full allowance of time for debate used to read out the names and dates KIA of Ukrainian war dead who might reasonably have been saved by either medical aid delayed by this stunt, or not in combat that day due to superior firepower similarly delayed. That won’t happen, of course, because collegiality > consequences always and forever, but I would love to see it.

    Maybe not the best tactic to read the names of those who have died, since Biden decoupled further domestic Covid relief funding from the Ukrainian aid package.

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    NEW from sueonthetown: Rep. Henry Cuellar, the last anti-abortion Democrat in the House, fired a staffer at 28 weeks pregnant after she requested maternity leave. Two weeks later, her pregnancy ended in a stillbirth...

    She sued Cuellar for pregnancy and sex discrimination, and he asked his staffers to write letters trying to discredit her.

    Cuellar is running in a primary against Jessica Cisneros, a progressive abortion rights supporter. And House leadership--Pelosi and Clyburn, namely--are still backing Cuellar, the only House Democrat to vote against the Women's Health Protection Act.
    In August 2018, Kristie Small was newly serving as the acting chief of staff for Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar, an anti-abortion Democrat, when she told him she was pregnant. Small requested maternity leave via email, and Cuellar responded that they would need to talk about the leave—and the 90-day probationary period for all new hires. It was the first time Small, who already had a young daughter, had ever heard about the policy, which wasn’t in the employee handbook. Cuellar never approved her parental leave and, on October 16, he fired her over the phone, citing poor job performance, while she was in her third trimester. About two weeks later, Small delivered her baby at 30 weeks pregnant. It was a stillbirth.

    Small filed a lawsuit against Cuellar’s office in May 2019, alleging both sex and pregnancy discrimination under federal law and noting that she’d worked for another congressman for 13 years without any performance issues. Cuellar’s office tried to dismiss the lawsuit on summary judgment and submitted letters from Small’s colleagues about her job performance but, according to court documents reviewed by Jezebel, Cuellar himself requested staffers write these letters after he fired Small, and at least five were dated after Small filed her lawsuit.

    Wow, who would have thought the anti-choice Democrat was shitty towards pregnant staffers? Wonder if this will change all those endorsements the Dem leadership gave him over the progressive candidate...

    DarkPrimus on
  • Options
    KaputaKaputa Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    edit - never mind i thought this was a new article, it was from last year. Instead I'll ask a question:

    Who is still opposing the PRO Act in the Senate? All of the GOP, I would assume. Articles from last year list Manchin as supporting it, but say Mark Kelly, Mark Warner, and good ol' Sinema weren't on board. Is that the most up to date situation? Did the bill just slowly die once "Senate" happened like so many other things?

    Kaputa on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Kaputa wrote: »
    edit - never mind i thought this was a new article, it was from last year. Instead I'll ask a question:

    Who is still opposing the PRO Act in the Senate? All of the GOP, I would assume. Articles from last year list Manchin as supporting it, but say Mark Kelly, Mark Warner, and good ol' Sinema weren't on board. Is that the most up to date situation? Did the bill just slowly die once "Senate" happened like so many other things?

    Filibustered, never brought up, tried to stuff some of it in BBB, got Manchin'd.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

  • Options
    DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    Republicans hate babies and love terrorists.

    None of this is new information is it?

    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    I like to ART
  • Options
    joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    They love “babies” when they’re inside a woman and can be used to control said woman

    Once they’re out and can’t be used to dominate a woman they’re just massive layabouts crying for big government formula handouts

    Pull yourself up by your tiny little bootstraps, babies!

  • Options
    MagellMagell Detroit Machine Guns Fort MyersRegistered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Pro-Life party my ass.

  • Options
    kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    I assume it'll all die in the Senate though?

    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
  • Options
    MagellMagell Detroit Machine Guns Fort MyersRegistered User regular
    I'm hopeful they can get the baby formula one through, but the domestic terrorism one definitely isn't passing.

  • Options
    EinzelEinzel Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Wouldn't it be cool if this was broadcast on the 6 o clock news? It won't, but wouldn't that be cool?

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Ah, I should have noted earlier that the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill was being discussed back in April, but it was supposedly modified from the original draft to address concerns from more progressive House members about how the bill might simply empower law enforcement agencies to better target and disrupt left-leaning activist groups disproportionately - as has been done historically.

    I guess time will tell, but I hope that the concerns were well and truly listened to and accounted for.

    DarkPrimus on
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Einzel wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Wouldn't it be cool if this was broadcast on the 6 o clock news? It won't, but wouldn't that be cool?

    Republicans voting no on things is expected and not novel so the media feels no need to view it as bad or even all that newsworthy.

  • Options
    kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Einzel wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Wouldn't it be cool if this was broadcast on the 6 o clock news? It won't, but wouldn't that be cool?

    Republicans voting no on things is expected and not novel so the media feels no need to view it as bad or even all that newsworthy.

    Not even that, but just report on the House Dems passing stuff. People here don't even know about a lot of it, you get forumers blaming Pelosi for the Dems not passing <x> law months after she already got it through the House. If that's the average awareness here, the average American has no idea that House Dems do anything.

    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    kime wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Einzel wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Wouldn't it be cool if this was broadcast on the 6 o clock news? It won't, but wouldn't that be cool?

    Republicans voting no on things is expected and not novel so the media feels no need to view it as bad or even all that newsworthy.

    Not even that, but just report on the House Dems passing stuff. People here don't even know about a lot of it, you get forumers blaming Pelosi for the Dems not passing <x> law months after she already got it through the House. If that's the average awareness here, the average American has no idea that House Dems do anything.

    This is why the Democrats need to create their own parallel communications channel. Too many of them rely on the media to do their job for them and the media doesn't give a fuck and/or actively works against them.

  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

    The current option is becoming more and more untenable.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

    The current option is becoming more and more untenable.

    The current status is still a perfectly valid choice for Puerto Ricans to make though and deliberately excluding it looks like trying to rig the vote.

  • Options
    DarkPrimusDarkPrimus Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

    The current option is becoming more and more untenable.

    The current status is still a perfectly valid choice for Puerto Ricans to make though and deliberately excluding it looks like trying to rig the vote.

    Requiring a majority vote instead of ranked voting when the choices have nuance and don't boil down to easy A, B, or C choices is what makes it look like they're trying to rig the vote to keep the current option.

  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

    The current option is becoming more and more untenable.

    The current status is still a perfectly valid choice for Puerto Ricans to make though and deliberately excluding it looks like trying to rig the vote.

    Requiring a majority vote instead of ranked voting when the choices have nuance and don't boil down to easy A, B, or C choices is what makes it look like they're trying to rig the vote to keep the current option.

    The current option isn't even a choice they can pick so I find it a little hard to believe they're rigging things in favor of that.

  • Options
    Marty81Marty81 Registered User regular
    DarkPrimus wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

    The current option is becoming more and more untenable.

    The current status is still a perfectly valid choice for Puerto Ricans to make though and deliberately excluding it looks like trying to rig the vote.

    Requiring a majority vote instead of ranked voting when the choices have nuance and don't boil down to easy A, B, or C choices is what makes it look like they're trying to rig the vote to keep the current option.

    But it has a runoff, which when there are three choices amounts exactly to ranked choice...

  • Options
    GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    No majority = current choice

    wbBv3fj.png
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    A measure to have PR vote on a change in their status has been introduced in Congress. Unfortunately it's...kind of stupid?

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/congressional-lawmakers-reach-consensus-puerto-rico-status-bill-call-p-rcna29672

    It introduces a binding vote, which is fine. The problem is that it doesn't allow keeping the current option, and it introduces three options with no ranked voting. (statehood, independence, "sovereignty with free association" It does require a majority vote and a runoff, but has the potential to lead to some real stupid strategic voting stuff. I'm also still not sure what the third option even is.

    The Senate is almost certainly going to kill it regardless.

    Sovereignty with Free Association would be akin to the relationship between the Cook Islands and New Zealand. Sovereign Statehood, but outsourcing certain aspects like Defense and/or Foreign Policy to the other Nation. For Puerto Rico I wouldn't be surprised if Trade would be included in there too and have a FTA agreement that's basically everything akin to what they have now. They'd just stop being a colony.

  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    No majority = current choice

    Two things:
    That is not a valid way to do election.
    It's not actually possible for that outcome to happen. A/B/C go first. If no clear majority, top two go on. There is no way for "none of these options" to win.

  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    That is not a valid way to do election.

    ding ding ding!

  • Options
    XeddicusXeddicus Registered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Pro-Life party my ass.

    No one reads these bills do they. The "Baby Formula" bill had almost nothing to do with baby formula. It gave the FDA $28 million to hire more staff. Who will not be making/buying baby formula. And who had $100 million few weeks ago approved already. So basically they're throwing money around and saying they're doing something while not doing anything but spending money. The GOP did approve a bill to allow people on WIC to get baby formula, something that will actually help.

    And the 'Domestic terrorism' bill, well, if you insist on calling trespassing an insurrection and destroying cities protests it's no wonder some people don't have much stock in the need or ability of a "domestic terrorism" anything.

  • Options
    jungleroomxjungleroomx It's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovels Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Xeddicus wrote: »
    And the 'Domestic terrorism' bill, well, if you insist on calling trespassing an insurrection

    Trespassing to prevent legally elected officials from taking office is insurrection you fucking goose.

    jungleroomx on
  • Options
    Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Also who inspects baby formula genius? And who will need extra staff fl handle imports? Oh right the FDA.
    Xeddicus wrote: »
    And the 'Domestic terrorism' bill, well, if you insist on calling trespassing an insurrection

    Trespassing to prevent legally elected officials from taking office is insurrection you fucking goose.

    Oh of course don't forget the chants to murder the vice president, the recorded desire to murder the leader of the house.

    And also the bombs and guns
    While certain Oath Keepers members and affiliates breached the Capitol grounds and building, others remained stationed just outside of the city in quick reaction force (QRF) teams. According to the indictment, the QRF teams were prepared to rapidly transport firearms and other weapons into Washington, D.C., in support of operations aimed at using force to stop the lawful transfer of presidential power. The indictment alleges that the teams were coordinated, in part, by Caldwell and Vallejo.

    https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leader-oath-keepers-and-10-other-individuals-indicted-federal-court-seditious-conspiracy-and

    It wasn't trespassing it was a lynch mob.

    Meanwhile I live in one of thise "destroyed cities" and hmm exactly zero buildings burned down. I mean Fox did copy paste a fire from an unrelated protest into coverage for here and Photoshop th same arrned dude into multiple photos but hey if you're a credulous goose I could see how you'd go for that lie.

  • Options
    MagellMagell Detroit Machine Guns Fort MyersRegistered User regular
    Xeddicus wrote: »
    Magell wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Pro-Life party my ass.

    No one reads these bills do they. The "Baby Formula" bill had almost nothing to do with baby formula. It gave the FDA $28 million to hire more staff. Who will not be making/buying baby formula. And who had $100 million few weeks ago approved already. So basically they're throwing money around and saying they're doing something while not doing anything but spending money. The GOP did approve a bill to allow people on WIC to get baby formula, something that will actually help.

    And the 'Domestic terrorism' bill, well, if you insist on calling trespassing an insurrection and destroying cities protests it's no wonder some people don't have much stock in the need or ability of a "domestic terrorism" anything.

    The white guys who leave a manifesto about fears of the Great Replacement then drive three hours to shoot up a majoruty black establishment are the terrorists.

    Plus people on WIC already get formula, the problem is there isn't any formula for them to get.

  • Options
    FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    Xeddicus wrote: »
    Magell wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Pro-Life party my ass.

    No one reads these bills do they. The "Baby Formula" bill had almost nothing to do with baby formula. It gave the FDA $28 million to hire more staff. Who will not be making/buying baby formula. And who had $100 million few weeks ago approved already. So basically they're throwing money around and saying they're doing something while not doing anything but spending money. The GOP did approve a bill to allow people on WIC to get baby formula, something that will actually help.

    And the 'Domestic terrorism' bill, well, if you insist on calling trespassing an insurrection and destroying cities protests it's no wonder some people don't have much stock in the need or ability of a "domestic terrorism" anything.

    The white guys who leave a manifesto about fears of the Great Replacement then drive three hours to shoot up a majoruty black establishment are the terrorists.

    Plus people on WIC already get formula, the problem is there isn't any formula for them to get.

    That would be why we are importing a whole bunch of it

  • Options
    IlpalaIlpala Just this guy, y'know TexasRegistered User regular
    Xeddicus wrote: »
    Magell wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Pro-Life party my ass.

    No one reads these bills do they. The "Baby Formula" bill had almost nothing to do with baby formula. It gave the FDA $28 million to hire more staff. Who will not be making/buying baby formula. And who had $100 million few weeks ago approved already. So basically they're throwing money around and saying they're doing something while not doing anything but spending money. The GOP did approve a bill to allow people on WIC to get baby formula, something that will actually help.

    And the 'Domestic terrorism' bill, well, if you insist on calling trespassing an insurrection and destroying cities protests it's no wonder some people don't have much stock in the need or ability of a "domestic terrorism" anything.

    Why do you think they won't be buying formula? All the bill says is the money "shall be available to address the current shortage of FDA-regulated infant formula and certain medical foods in the United States and to prevent future shortages, including such steps as may be necessary to prevent fraudulent products from entering the United States market"

    FF XIV - Qih'to Furishu (on Siren), Battle.Net - Ilpala#1975
    Switch - SW-7373-3669-3011
    Fuck Joe Manchin
  • Options
    MillMill Registered User regular
    Also if the FDA is able to hire more inspectors. That could easily lead to being able to catch problems before they hit a point, that requires shutting plants down. Let's face it, we're in this mess because republicans, the party of greedy and bigoted assholes, made it a point to ensure that government regulatory bodies couldn't probably function. So the shitheads in charge of that plant had more leeway to shrug off doing shit that they should be doing to keep their products safe. Part of the idea with some inspections, is not only to catch problems, but to catch problems early on before they have a chance to cause major problems. Ironically, this is really a case where the very regulations that asshole conservatives fight against, claiming they hurt business, are actually beneficial since minimize having to fully shut down a plant for major health risks, is actually good for business. Not only does it prevent a loss of profits because the plant is shut down, it also avoids financial losses from eating a shit ton of lawsuits over that plant's product harming consumers.

    Hell, given past history, a smart business person wants Congress funding a regulatory body that prevents short sighted fucking idiots from really pissing off the public. I imagine a mob of people showing up at one's door because they are fucking pissed about one's product killing their kids, so that one could speed up acquiring their next yacht. Can really put a damper on things when they really decide they want their pound of literal flesh in compensation; especially, if they happened to burn the plant to the ground before showing up.

  • Options
    Lord_AsmodeusLord_Asmodeus goeticSobriquet: Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered User regular
    The mistake commonly made by members in all levels of economic and political spectrums, is the assumption that rich people are smart.

    Usually they are not.

    Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
  • Options
    monikermoniker Registered User regular
    Xeddicus wrote: »
    Magell wrote: »
    DarkPrimus wrote: »



    On the SAME day, Republicans both held a press conference blaming Biden for the baby formula shortage *AND* voted against a bill that would ensure access to baby formula amid a shortage.
    NEW: The House approves $28 million to respond to the baby formula shortage by a vote of 231-192.

    Every NO vote was a Republican.
    NEW: The House has voted 222-203 in favor of the Domestic Terrorism Prevention bill. Only one Republican, Adam Kinzinger, voted in favor. All other Republicans voted against it.

    Pro-Life party my ass.

    No one reads these bills do they. The "Baby Formula" bill had almost nothing to do with baby formula. It gave the FDA $28 million to hire more staff. Who will not be making/buying baby formula.

    It seems like you are the one with the reading comprehension issues. More FDA Inspectors means more regular FDA inspections of formula making plants. Catching the plant failures that allow deadly Cronobacter to contaminate infant formula sooner. Resulting in fewer pallets needing to be recalled, shorter shutdown times to bring the plant into compliance with not killing babies through negligence, and fewer sickened children.

This discussion has been closed.