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
The Senate doesn't rule any more than the President. The Senate must also compromise with the House. If America doesn't want Republicans to influence policy, then America has to stop voting for Republicans.
The real question is, why do Republicans choose to use their leverage on this shit? The answer is simple. It allows them to undermine Democrats by splitting the left. Your reaction is the exact reason why trans people just got screwed. You are personally more responsible than anyone in the Senate.
There need to be hard red lines. Human rights are one of these. This bill is literally, without any exaggeration, going to result in several thousand dead children. But the very survival of trans people is "political," so it's OK to sacrifice our lives for the sake of political expediency.
A few thousand dead kids is nothing, because deep down, people don't see trans people as human beings.
I sincerely doubt it. The impact is limited to trans children of active service members who do not have a second parent with health insurance. Furthermore, trans healthcare for kids generally means puberty blockers, not surgeries or other expensive interventions. As far as I can gather, that's about $5k-$12k per year if insurance pays, and likely lower with self pay discounts. That's easily doable with a GoFundMe.
None of that is to say it's OK. I'm just addressing the assertion of thousands of deaths.
Nobody should be thrown under the bus, but political reality in a split government says that someone will be. This gave Republicans the hate fix they so desperately wanted with probably less impact than with any other group. I still agree it sucks, but without knowing what the alternatives were, it's not rational to assume Democrats just didn't care to do better.
There are about 2 million minors on Tricare. Around 1% of the population is trans, then that's 20,000 kids. The suicide attempt rate among trans kids untreated is about 40%. If only a quarter of those succeed, that's 2,000 dead kids among Tricare's current enrollees.
Now your despicable suggestion that people rely on GoFundMe for their life-saving healthcare? Or your hope that most families on Tricare have good insurance through their other partner? When military famously move so much that the other partner mantaining a good job is difficult? Those have obvious problems with them. The GoFundMe is a particularly demonic suggestion. Suffice it so say that no, thousands of families of trans kids are not going to find donors for thousands a year on fucking GoFundMe. This is healthcare, and that is what health insurance is for.
So yes, thousands of dead children is not in any way an exaggeration. Congress just willingly voted to murder several thousand children. And people like you are perfectly happy with it, as you do not consider trans people to be human beings.
The percentage of people who attempt suicide and eventually succeed is actually more like 10-15%. Receiving medical treatment is a factor in whether a trans child attempts suicide, but it is only one of many, and not the most important. In 2022 Tricare had a total of 2,500 kids receiving some form of gender affirming care, a far cry from your estimate of 20,000. I really don't want to quibble too much on the numbers because 1 kid is too many, but it's not going to be thousands in any case.
I was also not talking specifically about puberty blockers, not mental healthcare in general. Where I was mistaken, is that puberty blockers are actually not impacted by this bill at all, and will still be made available. Since you are an apparent activist on this issue, I would have thought that was something you would have caught. The treatments being disallowed are specifically those that might "result in sterilization" - treatments that are rarely ever performed on trans minors. I want to be clear here in saying that this does not mean I think the change is OK.
Lets be clear about the nature of my suggestion. It's analogous to explaining how two people can share a gas mask in a chemical attack. It's not how I think it should work, but it's an option that's better than nothing. My perspective is that the only people who should be involved in these decisions are doctors, patients, and if applicable patients. Medical care should be a right, but I know that's not where things are today - for anyone.
And, again, we don't know what was on the table that might have been even worse. What we do know is that if the bill didn't get passed that all healthcare benefits would be impacted for every military family, not to mention delays in pay. If the Democrats held a hard line and refused to compromise, the Republicans could just hold off a month and bypass the Democrats altogether. Then we might actually have seen all gender affirming care pulled, instead of just care for minors that might result in sterilization.
I'll say this again too. I don't give the Democrats a complete pass on this. In this particular situation I don't think they had a choice, but in the past several years they have avoided this topic almost completely and allowed Republicans to frame the entire issue. I have deep problems with what Democrats did leading up to this situation that helped put them in this spot.
What group did Republicans object to throwing under the bus?
Oh yeah, that only ever works one way, and it only ever works with people that Democrats consider expendable.
What? Who said they did? Republicans need to throw someone under the bus. That's fascist strategy 101. They just don't care who it is.
Let's put you in charge of the party then. Who do you choose to sacrifice instead? The Republicans are going to insist on some red meat. If the bill gets pushed off until January 20, it's just going to result in far worse for more people. One small charity could completely mitigate this issue for everyone, so why aren't you working on that?
This is just the beginning of the shit this country will be dealing with for at least the next couple of years. If the Democrats don't absolutely crush it in 2026, it will be a lot longer than that. You want to play these fucking games and pretend that Democrats are the enemy, then the blood can be on your hands.
I say this fully aware that the Democrats are on the wrong side of lots of issues that I care about, but there is no issue where they are worse than the Republicans. We can help by fixing the culture. Politicians are not good at doing the work of activists. (And activists generally make lousy politicians.)
And Democrats play along. That's complicity 101.
Your question is based on the incorrect assumption that fascists are happy when they have achieved the sacrifice of one group. Who do you choose to sacrifice next? Because there will be a next. The trans people you consider expendable? When Republicans move on to the next entry on their "then they came for" list, there is one fewer entry between you and being the group Democrats are willing to jettison to save the dwindling whole.
I know why you aren't. In my case, this happened yesterday. But hey, anyone who describes a problem has to singlehandedly solve it as it happens, or nothing they say is valid.
Yup. Democrats shoveling vulnerable populations into the maw in an effort they know to be in vain to placate implacable fascists.
Democrats are culpable for their complicity. You just want no accountability as your party turns quisling.
They're on the wrong side of a lot of issues you don't consider important too.
It's not about making fascists "happy", and no, I have no delusions on that account, and I don't consider anyone expendable. But, if we went into the next administration without a defense funding bill, Republicans would still get what they did, and have the chance to attach anything else they wanted as well. The choice the Democrats had was this, or worse than this, so Biden signed.
Going into the next administration, Democrats will have zero power to be complicit in anything. The people "shoveling vulnerable populations into the maw" will be Republicans - the same people that do it today.
Wow, you have no fucking clue how I feel about holding Democrats accountable. I just hold them accountable for the things they actually have power over. I've ripped Harris to shreds over her cowardly hiding from trans issues in the campaign, and Biden before that. I've been advocating for overthrowing the Democratic establishment for 30 years.
They will have the ability to pass anything they want as a standalone bill. That's no reason for Democrats to be complicit now. This is the last word trans people will get from Democrats for a long time.
Worse than this is already inevitable. Democrats could have chosen to not do this. And let's not pretend that this was reluctant, either. Not with the sheer numbers of Democratic votes this got. And this is after a campaign season during which Democrats ran ads with Republican anti-trans bigotry.
So they're taking advantage of the opportunity now.
You've been making excuses for them throwing trans people under the bus here.
And their hands are always conveniently tied.
Pro war Democrats are worse on the issue of foreign policy than the 1 or 2 anti war Republicans.
They're worse only on foreign policy, but they are worse.
1 or 2 Republicans? That's such a creative way to do logic that I'm impressed!
Yeah, I totally concede. Straight up. In fact, I'll bet that the average Democrat is worse than 1 or 2 Republicans on every issue! You fucking got me, LOL.
Disapproving something only takes a single counter example. You've obviously never taken a class on Logic since you seem to believe otherwise.
EDIT: Here is the beginner level text book on how that logic works, if you want to actually learn something: click to actually learn about logic! 😀
Thomas Massie, an absolute shit bird of an evil human being has better foreign policy views on Iarael then Biden, or any Democratic member that supports the genocide.
He is wrong on everything else.
You're lecturing me on logic yet you haven't even mastered basic reading comprehension. "Republicans" is not the same as "all Republicans" or "every Republican". Had I used either of those you might have had a point but I didn't because I'm not an idiot.
Compromise is not enthusiastic capitulation, which is what we got. This wasn't a squeaker. Democrats overwhelmingly voted for this in the senate. The party abandoned trans people and you're defending them for it.
Well, Democrats' last word to trans people for the foreseeable future was "we're doing what Republicans want." Democrats had an opportunity to do better here.
Because they know that Democrats will break solidarity with any vulnerable minority and then blame anyone who is upset about it, like so:
This is bullshit. Centrists are responsible for their own cowardice and their own complicity. Don't blame people who are upset because you got everything you wanted.
An overwhelming vote is not the same as an enthusiastic vote. The bill got 100% of the Democratic vote in the executive branch, yet Biden was far from enthusiastic about that provision.
The Democrats had to compromise with Republicans on something, and Republicans choose which issues to compromise on, and which to hold firm to. The Republicans chose trans people, not the Democrats. It's possible that the Democrats could have offered some other group, but they don't have the power for it not to screw any vulnerable minority. That bill was never going to arrive at the Senate.
Cowardice and centrism have nothing to do with this bill. I'm the first to agree that Democrats are cowardly centrists, but not in this context. When Democrats have to compromise with Republicans to pass critical legislation, that legislation will definitionally be more "centrist" than the Democrats themselves.
Where cowardly centrism comes into play is in presenting their case to the American people. I absolutely do blame Kamala and her consultants for totally avoiding trans issues in her campaign. But, when the election is done, the country doesn't operate without compromises with elected Republicans.
I'm not sure why you would assume I got everything I wanted. The trans stuff is just the start of what I don't like about this funding bill. I also have no doubt that if the Democrats owned both branches that there would still be a lot I don't like, but I think the trans provision would be gone.
It was unfair of me to say it was your fault that Republicans chose to force the trans issue in this bill. It's not. It will be your fault when they do it next time though, because you are rewarding them for it.
Yes it is.
He says he isn't. You give him the benefit of the doubt. You trust him. I do not.
Or capitulation, as in this case.
Because you're carrying water for a lame duck president whose career is over.
I don't.
And the next time Democrats throw trans people under the bus, it'll be your fault for defending them. Not that this isn't the intended outcome.