4 ms·

You think Citizens United was merely about free speech and ignore these consequences that decision has had. An unelected, non Congressionally approved billiona

• rayiner 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • sympil 2y ago
    …than billionaires publicly announcing everything they’re doing on X. This take is as naive to about the reality of what is going on as your take that Citizens United is merely a free speech case. People like you will thrive in the new system. They will need people to rationalize the upending of decades long political understandings and agreements on how governance occurs. As you know no complex system can rely solely on the written rules. When the norms are thrust aside with the speed and suddenness and scope as they are now there are always sycophants ready to rationalize. Having one person appoint a cabal of people to make decisions on which grants/appropriations to rescind is anti-thetical to the spirit of American governance. The decions made for the grants were spread out over thousands of people and there is safety in decentralization. These were monies appropriated by Congress and signed into law by the Executive branch. The concentration of power and control over the purse is alarming. It’s autocratic in nature. no less “Congressionally approved” than the thousands of civil servants Congress approves the budgets and that includes budgets for hiring people. Congress has not given to the President the authority to rescind previous allocations as his friend sees fit.