this post was submitted on 05 May 2026
97 points (100.0% liked)

politics

29677 readers
2237 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. 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.
  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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The Senate Judiciary Committee and Senate Homeland Security Committee on Monday night released legislative text for the $72 billion budget reconciliation bill that would bypass Democratic opposition to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol through 2029. The committees released the legislation after the Senate and House passed a joint budget resolution last month unlocking the special budget reconciliation process that will allow them to move funding for immigration enforcement without conceding to Democratic demands for reforms that have hung up the funding for months. The package will be able to pass the Senate with a simple-majority vote instead of needing 60 votes to advance.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Probably lots of reasons. At least one of which is that too many don't want to pay for services for people who "don't deserve it".
Another is a religion-based idea that helping people is bad for them because they won't work without 'motivation'

[–] canadian_commie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Doesn’t healthcare poll well across party lines?

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

About 60% of conservatives don't want it and they've been able to stop progress since Lieberman killed the public option in Obamacare. There's also the issue that while 90% of more liberal Americans want some form of federal assistance, pharma and health insurance lobbies Dem representatives very hard.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

since Lieberman killed the public option

He's a guy I like to bring up for the both-siderists that like to pretend to be smart when talking about the "extremes on both sides", LOL.

My retort? "You mean like Lieberman? That kind of extremist on the Democratic Party?"

Usually I get confused looks because the people that talk about "extremists on both sides" are either just reactionary centrists or just low-info trying to come off as being above it all. Either way, they are usually just clueless and full of shit.

Usually they want to talk about someone like AOC or some nameless activists that something something BLM/Antifa/"defund the police". Or trans or the "open borders" that we don't actually have and did not have under Biden or Obama...

Yes but plenty of things do when there's no active push against it via the propaganda networks. For example environmentalism, rail expansion, and green energy generally have a solid bit of Republican support especially in rural areas so long as there's isn't any active war drumming against them.