• 407 Posts
  • 732 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 1st, 2023

help-circle
  • If the filibuster is removed, it is also possible to get through with 50+VP as tie breaker or 51. The filibuster being removed is not as unlikely as you may think since Republicans right now are getting closer and closer towards defacto removing the filibuster. There currently are narrow ways around the filibuster (reconsideration is one big one) that are supposed to have a bunch of limitations, but they are testing the waters in ignoring violations of those limitations. The senate parliamentarian is the one who makes rulings about if something violates their clauses, but their opinion can be ignored by a strict majority via the “nuclear option”

    A month ago, Republicans used the nuclear option to ignore the senate parliamentarian ruling that the Congressional Review Act would not allow them to skip the filibuster to remove California’s EPA waivers (see here).

    As I write this Republicans are currently trying to play another different a different trick about some of the stuff in the Big Beautiful Bill. Dems have been challenging a bunch of provisions and getting the parliamentarian to most of the time rule they are in violation of the Byrd rule. But they are also trying to challenge the whole bill as violating the Byrd rule’s limit that a bill passed via reconsecration cannot increase the deficit over a ten-year period. Republicans are playing an accounting trick to claim it doesn’t. They know the parliamentarian is unlikely to agree with them, so they are currently trying to prevent dems from even being able to ask the parliamentarian about it

















  • US Senator Van Hallen (from Maryland) flew down to El Salvador managed to see him after applying a bunch of pressure in mid April. So he was at least alive then. Photos were published and such of said meeting

    Other dems from congress have flow down besides Van Hallen, but haven’t been able to get a visit. They’ve also had a ton less media attention, so there was less pressure on El Salvador to let them visit him. For instance, Glenn Ivey traveled to El Salvador and tried to visit a week ago but I doubt most people here probably heard about that







  • Not the person you are replying to, but that’s not what the point of the name the trait question is about. It is not about distinguishing between species

    Why are humans morally considered is not asking why humans are human. Asking why one doesn’t morally consider chickens is not asking why chickens are chickens

    It is about distinguishing between what matters to ethics. It’s not a trait that makes them chickens vs humans. It’s about a trait or set of traits that makes someone morally considered

    Declaring that humans and chickens are distinct is not sufficient to say to they deserve radically different ethical consideration. Otherwise you are just saying that difference itself = justifying different ethical consideration, which is highly flawed. You could for instance, use that to say any group of humans are distinct in some way and thus deserve different moral consideration. Be it by gender, skin tone, etc.