1410

Congress voted against funding a cure for cancer just to block a win for Biden (www.usatoday.com)

submitted 3 months ago by homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

160 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Even though this would be a win for all Americans – and humanity – it apparently did not outweigh the politics of making a Democrat look good. This is the definition of party over country.

I'm a doctor.So is my mother. When she got cancer, I realized how little that mattered.

Republicans have stated budget cuts need to be made with an ever-growing debt. But where was this attitude when tax cuts for the wealthy were on the table in 2017? They don’t have to look at patients in the eye and break the devastating news that they have cancer. They don’t have to treat cancers that block intestines or drown a patient’s lungs in fluid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Stern@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

Reagan led the charge but there was also folks like Gingrich and Armey doing stuff like the Contract with America (Heritage Foundation endorsed) and pushing to never let the dems have a win, and always oppose whatever they do.

I'm of the opinion that sunshine laws also fucked things up but that's a whole other discussion.

[-] irreticent@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

I'm of the opinion that sunshine laws also fucked things up but that's a whole other discussion.

I apologize for steering the conversation toward another discussion, but I'm unfamiliar with the Sunshine Laws so I did a quick search:

"Sunshine laws are regulations requiring transparency and disclosure in government or business. Sunshine laws make meetings, records, votes, deliberations, and other official actions available for public observation, participation, and/or inspection. Sunshine laws also require government meetings to be held with sufficient advance notice and at times and places that are convenient and accessible to the public, with exceptions for emergency meetings." (https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/sunshinelaws.asp, Sept. 2023)

Again, I'm not familiar but, I'm not seeing a problem with transparency and advance notice to ensure transparency. What particular issues do you have with Sunshine Laws?

[-] Stern@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Sunshine laws for congress (Such as the Legislative Restoration Act of 1970, and the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976) mandated transparent voting and meetings. I think you can readily imagine the issues that could come about if your own vote was public, in the case of congressional voting some things change but importantly it means that a lobbyist can nearly guarantee a return on investment. It should come as no surprise that the amount of lobbying groups and money in lobbying has massively increased since the various Sunshine laws passed. It also has led to increased partisan voting since now the parties can give the boot to someone crossing the aisle.

https://congressionalresearch.org/Citations.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20150506161647/https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/03/28/buying-government-with-lobbying-money-2/

this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2024

1410 points (98.4% liked)

politics

19097 readers

1727 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

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:

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.
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.
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.
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.
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