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.
- 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.
- 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 ACA is a huge black mark on Obama's legacy. Clinton certainly wasn't going to push for universal healthcare. She was just a terrible candidate.
It was just really hard to get excited to pay 1100$ a month for bare bones family insurance. (At the time...it's closer to 2500 a month today).
Oh the most progressive healthcare reform ever is suddenly a bad thing? Fucking lol.
Want more? Vote and give them consistent and overwhelming victories. 2 years every 16 years is going to be slow. Bump that up champ.
In America? That was Medicaid, and was established in 1965 by adding Title XIX to the Social Security Act. The PPACA was the biggest increase in enrollment since it was established, but was by no means universal or even approaching the scope of the original act.
Your first sentence is a joke right? Most progressive health care ever is a misnomer. It was Romneycare rebranded.
Get a clue
It's a joke if your "black mark" is a joke. Like it or not, it was and is the most progressive healthcare ever, on a federal level if you want to be pedantic. Get a clue indeed.
Which brings us back to: If you want more, then you have to give Dems consistent and overwhelming victories.
In what way was it more progressive than Medicare and Medicaid?
Lyndon Johnson and the Great Society is the high-water mark of progressive domestic legislation. Nothing in the 60 years since then is remotely close - quite the opposite, actually
Lucy with the football.
Hello Mr Crab! You have graced me with two messages today. What shall we cover today? Oh, that they "take away" something. Ok let's cover how much power they have had:
They have had control of all 3 (house of reps, senate, and presidency) for 4 years of the last 24 years. If you to go back further, then it's 6 years of the last 44 fucking years. If you want more progress, then you're gonna have to up that!
Is this where you complain that they didn't do everything, everywhere, all at once when they had control? If so, then I say that writing up legislation takes time, energy, and political capital. You can't do literally everything, everywhere, all at once.
Ok we'll see how this conversation goes huh MrCrab.
And they wasted as much of that as possible. How large does the majority have to be? How long do we have to hold it before Democrats actually keep their fucking promises to someone other than Netanyahu?
When will Democrats start using the majorities we give them?
Yup there is Mr Crab! so I'll just C+P
Writing up legislation takes time, energy, and political capital. You can’t do literally everything, everywhere, all at once.
Here's a very short list of what Biden has done: Green energy, EV investment, union empowerment, student debt forgiveness, marijuana rescheduling and pardons, infrastructure, drug price controls, Chips act, PACT act, etc etc etc. Non-competes banned (by FTC along 'party lines'). Pardoning people kicked out for being gay. Supporting Ukraine.
But you want to suggest they aren't using the majority to do anything.
I wonder if that will suffice for this conversation!
Most of what you're claiming Biden accomplished aren't real accomplishments though... not yet at any rate. He WANTS to do more, it's that what he has done is either ineffective, blocked by the courts, or so far in the future nobody knows or cares.
For example...
EV investment. Biden signed a law pushing $7.5 billion dollars into fast charging infrastructure. That's fantastic! And 100% mandatory for an EV future.
In the 2 years since signing it, only 8 have been built. That's NOT a success.
https://reason.com/2024/05/30/7-5-billion-in-government-cash-only-built-8-e-v-chargers-in-2-5-years/
Now you can go "Well, that's not Biden's fault, he gave everyone the funding they needed to make it happen..."
No, but what IS Biden's fault is claiming it as a giant achievement when it's absolutely not.
When Republicans do it, we actively mock them, not claim we should put their face on Mt. Rushmore:
I'm sorry but y'all have no idea how many levels there are to infrastructure. Biden does funding and basic rules. Then the states and perhaps cities have to do the planning. Which is a big deal - if they're trying to fill in gaps they need to study this. Then after planning is public open houses and public input, which may change planning (loop created). That's where the nimbys get to cry and say no, which the government has to listen to and accommodate to various degree. Lots of back and forth between public, state planning, and federal ok. Then it goes to engineering (different than planning). Then a competitive bid - this is government, everything needs a long competitive bid for anti corruption. Then bid review. Then bid award. Then building permits. Then finally construction contractor mobilization. All those have wait times too because none of these companies or departments (planning, engineering, construction) are sitting twiddling their thumbs. New work generally goes to the back of the queue or has to be fit in somewhere.
Biden did his part, and yes after that it's not on him. Personally I don't blame or mock either party when things take time. He gets credit for his part. He was successful at his part.
You don't get to brag about it until it's done and it's, what? 1% done?
Same thing with student debt relief.
"We're going to forgive student debt! Yay!"
* If you borrowed $12,000 or less.
** And you haven't missed any payments in 10 years.
If you borrowed $12K or less and have been making payments for 10 years, you don't have any significant debt to forgive.
Dude I already explained the mechanism of infrastructure. I explained in great detail why it takes a long time and why you can't wait, which you don't even bother to respond to. You just make the same claim and you're off to the next one. For that I could talk about the courts and then how they had to rewrite the specifics (those weren't the conditions I heard, the ones I heard were very decent), but then you won't respond to the detail, you'll make the same claim, and you'll be off to next one again. What's the point?
So yes he gets credit for his part. Demanding we wait for the whole thing to play out when the wheels are in motion and it's happening is frankly ridiculous. Ciao.
I get it, it took a year of permitting and inspections to get solar panels on my house, but I wasn't bragging that it was done and how much solar I was generating when the project wasn't completed yet.
That's what Biden is doing. And if Harris loses in November, Trump will kill it all and Biden will have done nothing.
HE. HAS. NOT. RESCHEDULED. A. GODDAMNED. THING.
You've decided to lie to me, so we're done.
Lol are we at the point where you are being pedantic? He told whatever agency to take a look at scheduling, because it's their jurisdiction. Hint Hint wink wink.
You can be done, I just take it to mean you don't like his accomplishments (oh wait I said his, are you going to be pedantic again?)
You lied; we're done.
Lol yup you're being pedantic. On such an odd, little common turn of phrase. But you can leave, I just take it to mean you have no real response.
You lied. Cannabis is still Schedule 1. "We're looking into it" is not an accomplishment. You lied so we're done. If you don't like that, you shouldn't have lied.
Oh so instead I may have gotten a little ahead of the ball. Like wow you're still being pedantic. Instead of actually responding.
Have at being upset, I think everyone can see you're just trying to use it as an out instead of an intellectual response. Like how you keep saying you're done, but you keep coming back.
No, you lied.
Still coming back after you said done how many times.
Just a little ahead of the ball. You being this upset at that is frankly funny. Keep showing me and everyone else how you rely on being upset and pedantic instead of actually responding to either chain.
You just keep lying. It's what centrists do.
Lol back to your old attacks huh (made up attacks). Keep at being upset, it just shows me and everyone else that you can't respond to either chain. And frankly how you're at it for a very long time it seems.
If you wanted me to respond on your terms, you shouldn't have lied.
You're just showing you rely on being pedantic. Not even on the reply as a whole, just one item in what over a dozen points. No matter, keep at being upset, you just show me who you are!