3 ms·

There seem to be some tautologies happening here. There are only 2 major parties in the US Congress. Bipartisan bills, somewhat by definition, are going to be p

by roenxi 3y ago

There seem to be some tautologies happening here. There are only 2 major parties in the US Congress. Bipartisan bills, somewhat by definition, are going to be passed by both parties. Similarly, since there are 2 major parties, if legislation is proposed by one party then it would pass unless the other blocks it. I don't see how you're expecting things to work differently. Would we expect Democrat-sponsored legislation to fail for reasons apart from Republican opposition? > The reverse really is not true. I doubt that is a true statement, but assuming it is then logically that would just mean that Republicans only propose legislation after they have talked to the Democrats and confirmed they are willing to vote it through. But that would suggest the Republicans are avoiding opportunities to kick up a fuss which doesn't sound like the US Congress we all know and love. > c.f. current bills for border security Unrelated note but it is amazing to me that the US has been an entity for a couple of centuries now and doesn't have legislation already in place to control the border.

hattmall 3y ago
Of course the US has legislation to control the border. There is an entire agency called the border patrol. The thing is right now , it seems, additional legislation is needed to actually compel the executive to have the border patrol do their job. Which this last bill didn't even do and would have simply dumped money into an auxiliary judicial system that serves virtually no purpose and would continue to do so even with more money. Shortening the time for an asylum hearing doesn't even matter because people don't show up for them. Any bill that maintains the current administration's position of simply letting people go completely free during their asylum waiting period is useless. Sure, people with legit claims might show up, but crimminals, which are the problem, are not going to come back for the hearing. Most Americans don't mind immigrants or immigration at all and not even the idea of illegal immigration is really a problem. It's just the people that commit crimes that are the problem, it's one of the reason we see recent immigrants be so strongly in favor of border security, because the people they specifically tried to get away from are showing up too. Not only are people caught crossing the border illegally not detained, but apparently even when they commit additional crimes it's too much for some cities and states to even keep them in jail for those crimes.
- zarathustreal 3y ago
  This comment really highlights how you can have someone like GP thinking Republicans are inhibiting border control and Democrats are trying to do something about it. The discourse around the subject dictates what concepts are held in the mind while considering it. The implication by the left seems to be that the US should, obviously, allow anyone into the country and that the problem is the speed of the immigration process. The reality of the situation is that no country, the US included, can maintain the stable identity and order required to be considered “a country” while allowing unrestricted immigration. It’s simply not possible to accept immigrants without requiring that they know and follow the law, and that takes time to learn. Immediate access to the country does not facilitate that learning and obviously causes significant crime.
  - ajross 3y ago
    > The implication by the left seems to be that the US should, obviously, allow anyone into the country Indeed, there's a disconnect. I can't see anywhere in modern discourse that would have led you to believe that. Can you maybe cite the relevant policymakers or thought leaders or whoever that you are sure hold that opinion? Because I guarantee they don't actually exist. What you just typed is an echo chamber point. It's not what your political enemies think, at all. It's what your political allies[1] want you to think your political enemies think. It's nonsense. [1] Specifically the content-makers running the partisan media you consume.
    - IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
      He said the world 'implication' . I don't think you understand what it means. If I'm your child's teacher, and your child doesn't do his homework and gets and F, you are not able to say to me "show me where my kid said he wouldn't do his homework!" , as a defense.
ozr 3y ago
> I don't see how you're expecting things to work differently. Would we expect Democrat-sponsored legislation to fail for reasons apart from Republican opposition? There is a popular perception that: - If Democrats are in the minority and want to block a Republican bill, they will attempt to drum up public pressure, advocate on the floor and with individual legislators, etc. - If Republicans are in the minority and want to block a Democrat bill, they will by any means necessary. They'll use various edge cases of parliamentary procedure, attach/amend/manipulate bills to poison them, etc. 'Playing dirty'. I have no idea if this is actually true, but it's a common idea I've heard from both sides. The Democrats see it as a sign of their moral superiority, and the Republicans see it as an demonstration of conviction.
- roenxi 3y ago
  It sounds kinda stupid as theories go and I'm not going to believe there is anything meaningful happening without specific examples. Although I'll say on the outset that it wouldn't surprise me if it is basically a misdirection that the congresspeople are promulgating on a bipartisan basis to help them brand themselves. > use various edge cases of parliamentary procedure, attach/amend/manipulate bills to poison them, etc. 'Playing dirty'. This in particular is the part that seems a bit ridiculous. I'm sure they technically do all that, but if they have the numbers to do these things they also have the numbers to just vote bills down. It isn't 'playing dirty'. And these bills are generally rider-filled messes regardless. Maybe the argument is that the Republicans are secretly plotting against their own voters and trying to conceal it, which is the sort of theory that people on the right wing already believe. It is the right wing. One of the core political tenants is that politicians are corrupt, incompetent and untrustworthy. The right wing politicians don't really need to pretend, their voters already know - many of them go in with a mandate to try and shut the whole government down to try and limit the damage the Congress does. The bulk of voters on the right seem to be well aware by now that professional politicians, as a class, hate them. That is why there is this whole Trumpian revolt underway.

by roenxi 3y ago

hattmall 3y ago

Of course the US has legislation to control the border. There is an entire agency called the border patrol. The thing is right now , it seems, additional legislation is needed to actually compel the executive to have the border patrol do their job. Which this last bill didn't even do and would have simply dumped money into an auxiliary judicial system that serves virtually no purpose and would continue to do so even with more money. Shortening the time for an asylum hearing doesn't even matter because people don't show up for them. Any bill that maintains the current administration's position of simply letting people go completely free during their asylum waiting period is useless. Sure, people with legit claims might show up, but crimminals, which are the problem, are not going to come back for the hearing. Most Americans don't mind immigrants or immigration at all and not even the idea of illegal immigration is really a problem. It's just the people that commit crimes that are the problem, it's one of the reason we see recent immigrants be so strongly in favor of border security, because the people they specifically tried to get away from are showing up too. Not only are people caught crossing the border illegally not detained, but apparently even when they commit additional crimes it's too much for some cities and states to even keep them in jail for those crimes.

zarathustreal 3y ago
This comment really highlights how you can have someone like GP thinking Republicans are inhibiting border control and Democrats are trying to do something about it. The discourse around the subject dictates what concepts are held in the mind while considering it. The implication by the left seems to be that the US should, obviously, allow anyone into the country and that the problem is the speed of the immigration process. The reality of the situation is that no country, the US included, can maintain the stable identity and order required to be considered “a country” while allowing unrestricted immigration. It’s simply not possible to accept immigrants without requiring that they know and follow the law, and that takes time to learn. Immediate access to the country does not facilitate that learning and obviously causes significant crime.
- ajross 3y ago
  > The implication by the left seems to be that the US should, obviously, allow anyone into the country Indeed, there's a disconnect. I can't see anywhere in modern discourse that would have led you to believe that. Can you maybe cite the relevant policymakers or thought leaders or whoever that you are sure hold that opinion? Because I guarantee they don't actually exist. What you just typed is an echo chamber point. It's not what your political enemies think, at all. It's what your political allies[1] want you to think your political enemies think. It's nonsense. [1] Specifically the content-makers running the partisan media you consume.
  - IG_Semmelweiss 3y ago
    He said the world 'implication' . I don't think you understand what it means. If I'm your child's teacher, and your child doesn't do his homework and gets and F, you are not able to say to me "show me where my kid said he wouldn't do his homework!" , as a defense.

ozr 3y ago

> I don't see how you're expecting things to work differently. Would we expect Democrat-sponsored legislation to fail for reasons apart from Republican opposition? There is a popular perception that: - If Democrats are in the minority and want to block a Republican bill, they will attempt to drum up public pressure, advocate on the floor and with individual legislators, etc. - If Republicans are in the minority and want to block a Democrat bill, they will by any means necessary. They'll use various edge cases of parliamentary procedure, attach/amend/manipulate bills to poison them, etc. 'Playing dirty'. I have no idea if this is actually true, but it's a common idea I've heard from both sides. The Democrats see it as a sign of their moral superiority, and the Republicans see it as an demonstration of conviction.

roenxi 3y ago
It sounds kinda stupid as theories go and I'm not going to believe there is anything meaningful happening without specific examples. Although I'll say on the outset that it wouldn't surprise me if it is basically a misdirection that the congresspeople are promulgating on a bipartisan basis to help them brand themselves. > use various edge cases of parliamentary procedure, attach/amend/manipulate bills to poison them, etc. 'Playing dirty'. This in particular is the part that seems a bit ridiculous. I'm sure they technically do all that, but if they have the numbers to do these things they also have the numbers to just vote bills down. It isn't 'playing dirty'. And these bills are generally rider-filled messes regardless. Maybe the argument is that the Republicans are secretly plotting against their own voters and trying to conceal it, which is the sort of theory that people on the right wing already believe. It is the right wing. One of the core political tenants is that politicians are corrupt, incompetent and untrustworthy. The right wing politicians don't really need to pretend, their voters already know - many of them go in with a mandate to try and shut the whole government down to try and limit the damage the Congress does. The bulk of voters on the right seem to be well aware by now that professional politicians, as a class, hate them. That is why there is this whole Trumpian revolt underway.