House Speaker Johnson axes Trump voting restrictions in new government funding bill - eviltoast
  • Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson announced a new temporary government funding proposal with key amendments from the original bill he put forward earlier this month.
  • The new proposal goes against Donald Trump’s wishes and makes some concessions to Democrats.
  • The new bill would fund the government through Dec. 20 and does not include any part of the SAVE Act, the Trump-backed election security proposal that would require people to show proof of citizenship to register as a voter.
  • The previous version of Johnson’s bill, which Trump preferred, was attached to the SAVE Act and would have funded the government through March 2025.

🗳️ Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • PassingThrough@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Y’all need to get a word in with your representatives that what’s needed is legislation preventing budget bills from containing anything other than budgets.

    That would solve this problem real quick. It’s been sounding stupider and stupider using the budget meeting to force unpopular agendas down throats or else the government is held hostage.

    I think it would fit the bill if budgeting was held up over allocations, one side wants more border spending, one side wants more educational spending, etc, that would make sense but “allow us to attach this whole other unrelated law to declare the sky is actually green(which also contains a tag along that I get to be emperor), or nobody gets paid” is just ridiculous.

    • lemmydripzdotz456@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes, but also: Everything the government does costs money because someone has to make sure it’s being done. This stupid SAVE thing would have cost money to enforce and, therefore, it could be argued that it is related to the budget. That’s not a a very good argument, but it’s enough to slow down the process while they argue over it.

      • PassingThrough@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        An excellent argument to be made when arguing about the

        STop Unrelated Crap Killing budgets act.

        STUCK(b) Act. See? Even has a cool acronym.

        And if they take a few dozen sessions deliberating over it while the government keeps funding and running on previous bills, that’s OK. That’s the point. There should not be an easy path to leverage government’s ability function to force a vote in your favor, bypassing traditional debate, compromise, and processes.