this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2024
652 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19050 readers
3882 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
652
Warren: Democrats ‘will suspend the filibuster’ to codify Roe v. Wade (thehill.com)
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
160 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Progressive Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) announced Wednesday that there are currently enough votes in the Senate to suspend the filibuster to codify Roe v. Wade and abortion rights if Democrats win control of the House and keep the Senate and White House.

“We will suspend the filibuster. We have the votes for that on Roe v. Wade,” Warren said on ABC’s “The View.”

She said if Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2025, “the first vote Democrats will take in the Senate, the first substantive vote, will be to make Roe v. Wade law of the land again in America.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

if Democrats control the White House and both chambers of Congress in 2025

They aren't about to win a fucking trifecta. It will be a miracle if they keep the senate tied, let alone win the white house and take back the house.

Of course it is easy to say now all this shit if THAT is the condition for actually doing it: total control of government.

(And then SCOTUS can still throw it out as unconstitutional because that was the entire point of overturning roe v wade: it made the decision constitutional case law, which overrides legislated statutes.)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

With Biden no, but both the House and Senate are in play, and if you win one you probably win the others because the same sentiment that brought out votes to claim the Senate boosted House races and vice versa. Trifectas in a new administration are common. Reagan, Clinton, Obama, Trump, and Biden all had trifectas. The only ones who didn't start with them were the Bushes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Granted, if the Senate passed a law codifying Roe, it would die in the House.

However, why not show us that you have the votes and it can be done. Give us some action on the issue before the election.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

I simply don't believe it coming from her.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Can we just get rid of the fucking Lazy Filibuster, already? After all we know these geriatrics don't have the capacity to stand for hours and hours on the floor. To merely threaten cloture to filibuster is just dumb.

We almost did, but then Sinema blew it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 months ago

TBH I feel like there needs to be a general look at ways to prevent 'spamming' for want of a better word in government. Like the filibuster, and also that thing where after Obamacare was passed and the Republicans tried to repeal it over 70 times in the first few years. I get that situations change and you might need to change a law, but at a certain point you're just being belligerent and wasting everyone's time IMO.

Also it should be illegal to tack on irrelevant laws to popular bills to try and get them passed, but that's a whole other thing.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

FUUUCKIN DO IT

load more comments
view more: next ›