this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2024
338 points (94.7% liked)

politics

19246 readers
2469 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

HRC Article:

WASHINGTON — Last night, President Biden signed the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law, which includes a provision inserted by Speaker Mike Johnson blocking healthcare for the transgender children of military servicemembers. This provision, the first anti-LGBTQ+ federal law enacted since the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, will rip medically necessary care from the transgender children of thousands of military families – families who make incredible sacrifices in defense of the country each and every day. The last anti-LGBTQ+ federal law that explicitly targeted military servicemembers was Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which went into effect in 1994.

Biden's press release:

No service member should have to decide between their family’s health care access and their call to serve our Nation.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world 26 points 2 days ago (5 children)

I'm lost. He spoke against it, but signed it anyway. Did they give any rationalization for signing it?

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

If he didn't sign it then families would have just gone without coverage and the military would be unfunded until Trump entered office and signed it regardless. In fact, handing it off to the next congress could result in an even worse bill.

[–] ArchRecord@lemm.ee 14 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Paraphrasing here, but "we need to spend money on the military otherwise we won't be safe"

Except that doesn't really hold up since they could have sent it back to be modified and voted on again anyways.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

"if we need to do it, you can fuck off with this shit and do it right" should have been the official explanation of a veto.

[–] leadore@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No, not enough time to send it back and the R's knew exactly what they were doing here.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Democrats are willing to go into a government shutdown rather than cave. Biden should have fought harder.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Actually, Biden signed the congressional budget 5 days ago averting Shutdown. Democrats don't want shutdown, Republicans do.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Well as long as the soldiers get their Christmas bonuses, I suppose a few thousand dead children is an acceptable price to pay. We wouldn't want the soldiers to have their Christmas ruined, and it's not like it would be the Republicans' fault for politicizing a must-pass spending bill. Oh well, it's not like trans kids are really human, a 9/11 worth of child corpses is fine. We wouldn't want to ruin Christmas.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago

"Biden cares about trans people unlike Trump!"

Old bigot white dude is an old bigot, news at 11. At least Trump makes it clear he wants my kind to die in a fire for good ratings on Fox News.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›