Senators on Sunday released a highly anticipated $118 billion package that pairs border enforcement policy with wartime aid for Ukraine, Israel and other U.S. allies, setting off a long-shot effort to push the bill through heavy skepticism from Republicans, including House Speaker Mike Johnson.
The proposal is the best chance for President Joe Biden to resupply Ukraine with wartime aid — a major foreign policy goal that is shared with both the Senate’s top Democrat, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and top Republican, Sen. Mitch McConnell. The Senate was expected this week to hold a key test vote on the legislation, but it faces a wall of opposition from conservatives.
With Congress stalled on approving $60 billion in Ukraine aid, the U.S. has halted shipments of ammunition and missiles to Kyiv, leaving Ukrainian soldiers outgunned as they try to beat back Russia’s invasion.
The new bill would also invest in U.S. defense manufacturing, send $14 billion in military aid to Israel, steer nearly $5 billion to allies in the Asia-Pacific, and provide humanitarian assistance to civilians caught in conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza.
Why the fuck is it normal in the US to group together unrelated things… ‘the free healthcare for all bill is loosing support because of the mandatory puppy smashing rider’
It’s the go to compromise: I’ll add something for you if you vote for this bill.
Now that I’ve seen more bad government, I wish this happened more often. We’ve always done this, it’s not a new thing, but the new approach is having half the government just say no unless it’s exactly what they want. One way got things done in a middle of the road (but ugly) fashion, whereas the new way is just paralysis
I’m of a different mind believing the original policy trying to be passed is so watered down its just cover for the dog shit the opposition wants. Republicans in the past would have happily lined up to hand Ukraine and Isreal money only now have they positioned themselves to say they don’t want it.
It’s because of the lack of party discipline in the US political system. There’s no party whip to bring everyone in line, so bills need to cater to the whims of many individual politicians to get votes rather than being negotiated strictly at the leadership level.
There is. It tends to be the Senate Majority and Minority leaders in the Senate, and the Speaker in the House. Both parts of Congress do have official positions of Whips, but those are mostly secondary leaders. They don’t hold executive authority the way a Prime Minister does in a parliamentary system, so they can focus on being the external face of their portion of Congress, and the internal work of whips.
Democrats, for the most part, are all working on the same page. Nancy Pelosi–whatever her other faults–is actually very good at working the mechanisms of Congress to whip votes. Republicans, however, are eating each other in purity purges. If Matt Gaetz had his way, the party would continue these purges until it’s only a purified form of Matt Gaetz.
I’m almost nostalgic for the days of horsetrading politics where both parties needed to whip votes instead of things being a given along party lines. It resulted in a lot of shitty deals, but at least things got done.
Cut out Israel’s genocide funding and it will be all win.
So a bad thing, a good thing, and a bad thing. And luckily the Republicans in the House are likely to block it, but for the wrong reasons, while also suffering for it politically.
An inverse shit sandwich?
It’s cute that you think anyone but Democrats will suffer politically when this fails.
I know for one thing that fewer Palestinians will suffer for it failing. I also find your rhetorical device to be quite stale.
Think of it as a good thing for one group and for another group and for a third. Overall it has something good for most of us. This is how compromise used to work
I for one am not pleased to get a good thing at the expense of thousands of dead Palestinians or border security that denies the right to asylum because migrants are politically inconvenient. The Republicans held hostage munitions to kill Arabic people (a usually Republican priority) for an inhumane border policy (another Republican party). And Democrats pat themselves on the back for bipartisan negotiation.
Seems like 3 good things to me, money to allies and border control all wrapped in one package.
Yeah, money for genocide, and pointless border control that isn’t even necessary, definitely good things.
Regardless of what israil is doing the USA has a duty to their allies its called ensuring the global order. And border control is most definatly nessasary i think u will find that border control is a bipartisan issue they just disagree about implementarion. Unfortunarly neither side will get any implementation cos the deepstate (the american economy) needs a cheap disposable workforce and it wants to keep that workforce illegal, makes em easy to fire, prevents unionisation, and can be abused etc etc. here is a decent explanation
We also have a duty, if you wanna put it that way, not to support genocide. Let me put it simple for you since you aren’t getting it. I. Do. Not. Want. My. Tax. Dollars. Spent. On. Genocide.
As for your other argument, I’m not even going to address it, like I’m going to change your mind anyway. I don’t even know why I bother responding go stuff like this.
I support no side of the whole israil palestine clusterfuck its simply 2 nations killing eachother its called war shit happens. USA has a duty to their ally in a war thats what allies are for. And its not a genocide if u win have u heard of dresdon or hiroshima or nagasaki all where full of innocent civilians same as what israil is doing to palestine.
As for my other agument im guessing ur not going to address it cos its a good argument and ur incapable of finding a logical responce.
What Israel is doing is not helping ensure the global order you dolt
Its not about israel they are a footnote. Its about who isnt going to trust the USA when the USA offers protection in exchange for something. If people stop trusting the USA will protect them the rules based world order colapses and everyone scrambles to get the bigger stick which always happens to be MAD.
You can’t have a global order, or order at all, if the rules aren’t the same for everyone. Every time the West allows one of its allies to do something vile it’s going to be used as a justification by someone else. Allowing criminals on our side already let literal Nazis walk free in Nuremberg, and it’s the favorite excuse of international criminals worldwide - Kremlin’s keyboards probably have a “What about …” button to save them time.
There is no rule against genocide just a rule against genocide then losing a war to “us”.
“Isn’t even necessary”
It’s definitely a necessity to secure our border and protect the country from those that wish to subvert its law and order.
The call is coming from inside the house
Damn right, anyone that is breaking or subverting the laws of the US should be prosecuted.
Have you actually read all the laws? I’m pretty sure you broke a few just replying to me on Lemmy.
L take, only in a tankies wet dream is going against the popular opinion on social media a crime.
Securing our borders is code for I’m racist, and I think immigrants are dangerous. Fixed that for you.
You don’t get to break into the country, there are legal ways to immigrate to the US. If you don’t follow US law, you don’t deserve to be here.
You mean like we did when we slaughtered the native Americans already living here and claimed it as our own?
Back in a less civilized time when American Indians were fighting each other and conquering lands as well? Warfare is warfare, this is different. Also, if I remember correctly the American Indians fought and lost against the US, why wouldn’t we fight back now?
Okay. Expand immigration limits and make it easier for people to immigrate legally.
Until we do that, I have no issue with them subverting a system that exists just to keep whites in power.
I don’t see a problem with current immigration limits, and on your second point, people legally immigrate everyday, if they cannot follow a system millions have used before, they shouldn’t be in the country.
Lol
Immigration is a good thing.
Who else is going to fix America’s dying towns?
The legal immigrants that naturalize or are in the process of naturalization everyday. If you cannot follow the laws of the country, you don’t deserve to enter.
So the path that’s intentionally difficult for people from Latin America to follow.
How about we open up that path to them? That would solve a lot.
Why should we lower standards for particular groups of people. Besides asylum seekers, which you can claim at any legal entrance into the country and do not need to illegally break in, all people attempting to become Americans should be held to the same standard.
We should lower standards because we built them higher for them in the first place.
The standards are the exact same for everyone around the world besides the cases I mentioned before. No need to lower them because people in Latin America would rather subvert the laws of the country they want into rather than enter legally.
If you cannot follow the laws of the country, you don’t deserve to enter.
Absolutely bullshit argument when we consider things like seeking asylum to be illegal. And that’s not even touching the fact that you seem to equate legality with morality…
These aren’t asylum seekers, they are illegal immigrants running the border. Asylum seekers can claim asylum status at any legal entryway. On your second point, if you can’t follow the country’s laws, you shouldn’t be allowed a visa into the country. Morality or otherwise, do it the legal way and everyone’s happy.
What a shitty government.
While a lot of us don’t agree with the current boarder policy Trumps build a wall rhetoric was so divisive. A lot of us agree we should have a boarder and migration/immigration policy is necessary. The absolute dog shit of an idea ‘the wall’ is causes such a visceral response you would think people wanted to do away boarders all together and build a bridge to europe.
I’m going to be that guy, but it’s “border” not “boarder”. I feel like a person who uses the word visceral would want to know if they were using the wrong spelling.
Honestly not my first time making that mistake in the last two weeks. Some of us are just dense.
“The wall” is a simplistic approach that easily fits in headlines and slogans.
And is not based in reality if anyone were to spend more than 30 seconds thinking about it.
After seeing somewhat athletic people scale the highest parts in about a minute to show how useless it is, I would agree.
‘We demand you fund things at the border you’re not allowed to reach!’
Full text of the bill is linked to in the Senate Appropriations Committee Press Release
Surprised they managed to squeeze in any civilian aid for Gaza with AIPAC so determined to convince everyone in congress that even literal infants are Hamas supporters.
hmm… yeah that’s going nowhere
