I bet you someone from the red states saw that one guy trying to off Kavagnaugh and said they'd only sign on to CHIPS in exchange for better security funding fo

I bet you someone from the red states saw that one guy trying to off Kavagnaugh and said they'd only sign on to CHIPS in exchange for better security funding for SCOTUS. The majority gets their chip fab funding and the holdout rep gets to brag about protecting SCOTUS from "liberal extremists" or whatever. This is a trade. One thing people misunderstand about Congress is that it is primarily a negotiating body. That's why bills have so many unrelated provisions in them - these are not just laws, they are contracts between lawmakers. International treaties work the same way, too. Merely getting program Y or Z into a bill containing program X means that it's a package deal now. Either it all passes or it all fails, and the reps that pushed for Y or Z now have to vote for X, too. (This is vaguely related to the reason why the line-item veto is unconstitutional. If you could just sign X while vetoing Y and Z, that'd be like striking the data caps out of your cable contract and then suing Comcast for breach of a contract they never signed.)