That doesn't sound any different from currently?
Lobbyists and Oligarchs already offer post-term positions to congressmen.
In fact they'd just have to pay more than they do now because instead of one guy for 16 years of service its something like 4 guys for 4 years of service each.
I didn't say the protest was bad, just answering your question about hypothetical outcomes.
I don't really follow your logic about vetoing this now because of the changing congress, you're saying not passing the bipartisan bill and waiting for a more conservative bill that harms more people would be your ideal?
So you're just a Republican?
So you choose 0%, wow thats sick anon.
If they hadn't, then it likely would have led to a Bonus Army scenario. If you're not sure what that means, in 1932 tens of thousands of military servicemen and veterans gathered to protest congress and essentially force them to pay out bonds to soldiers.
We've had Government shutdowns before and this would be no different. Plus, the actual fund distribution wouldn't happen until the Appropriations bill comes later, anyways. In fact, theres a non-zero chance that Republicans rip this bill up and replace it after they gain majority and before the Appropriations bill comes.
The 118th congress is coming to an end, and changes to this bill have been in the news since June.
I was making a point that thousands was an exaggeration, but I don't feel strongly enough about it to defend the argument. We all agree the GOP are pieces of shit for doing this.
Always do, but the difficult part about winning is getting other people to vote Dem. Even this comment section is highly hostile to the idea despite being filled with people actively being harmed by republicans.
Biden’s move reduced the death sentences of 37 out of 40 prisoners on federal death row to life imprisonment without parole and followed pressure from campaigners who warned that they were likely to be executed on Trump’s return to the White House.
The exceptions applied to three men who had been convicted of offences regarded as terrorism or hate crimes, including Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was found guilty of carrying out the 2013 Boston marathon bombing attack.
Honestly if it's taking us this long to off the Boston Marathon Bomber, is it really any difference? /joke
Honestly kind of weird, you would expect him to allow literally anybody to advertise their drugs from his usual deregulatory stance.
No, they don't. Dems have 47 seats currently, 4 Independents caucus with the DNC to select majority leader who calls votes.
In a month it changes over to GOP majority control because last election more people voted for Republicans.
If any legislation gets introduced that the GOP doesn't like, the GOP can filibuster it and it wont pass without 60 votes.
That includes budget bills that allow the entire US Military to operate and all of its members to get salaries and healthcare coverage, as well as general budgets for the rest of the federal government including congress, airports, and regulatory offices. Thats why shitty budgets with antitrans policy is getting passed.
DNC don't decide if they win, we do. This is our job to do.
If me asking an honest question is a personal attack, then clearly the truth is your enemy.
Oh, actually, this is after they talked down a ton of other Republican amendments including stripping reproductive care, denying refugees, banning CRT in military academies, etc.
But hey, the "must pass" part gives Biden the authority to sign it without Republican approval, because Republicans could actually try to drag it out to add in all of their amendments like they have been doing for many months, it doesn't literally force the congress to pass something before the time limit because there are no consequences for not doing so aside from the military going unfunded: which Republicans have demonstrated they would absolutely do.