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.
I swear Biden is doing absolutely everything in his power to make his administration and the Democrats look as feckless and duplicitous as possible. All this bluster about saving democracy leading up to the election and he hasn’t lifted a finger to protect it since November 6th, but he sure does jump at the chance to abuse his pardon power and sign laws with bonafide conservative horseshit like this in it.
This country is an absolute joke. If this is what we were hoping would stop the tide of fascist ideology, then we’re doomed to suffer at the hands of spineless politicians who think compromise with the uncompromising is a winning strategy.
Trans allies: We need solidarity.
DNC: We will protect Trans people
Trans “allies”: Don’t vote for the DNC they’re not good enough
DNC: *loses election*
DNC: *Supports Queer folk less than before*
Oh how surprising. Who could’ve seen this coming.
Trans “allies”: Don’t vote for the DNC they’re not good enough
86% of LGBT people voted for Kamala Harris, at least according to exit polling.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-elections/exit-polls
These figures mark Trump’s worst-ever performance with LGBT voters — who make up about 8% of the population.
To blame transgender people, who make up a minority of the US population and electorate is not only untrue, as LGBT resoundedly voted democrat, but its also disgusting to somehow blame our oppression on ourselves. The Democrats lost this election because they failed to address the economic issues of the working class, and instead focused on centrist pandering and immigration. Democrats cannot advocate for the working class because ultimately they are beholden to the ruling class elites.
I’m talking about a very vocal part of the internet (infact this very site) that pretend that not voting for the DNC is virtuous and give lip service to queer issues. Hence the scare quotes.
I’ll take lip service over whatever we have in store for the foreseeable future. Wouldn’t be surprised if Republicans try to eradicate or criminalize lgbt.
Politicians support whatever they think the popular opinion is of voters. Most don’t care about lgbt but if they see enough voters do then they support stuff like gay marriage. Whenever they see lgbt rights lost during an election their takeaway is that it doesn’t matter to people who turn out to vote.
I’ll take lip service over whatever we have in store for the foreseeable future. Wouldn’t be surprised if Republicans try to eradicate or criminalize lgbt.
If you think you’re contradicting me on that point then I’ve been entirely misunderstood.
I was agreeing with you but I think my frustration with everything going on made the tone seem like it was against you.
This is the bill in question: H.R 5009
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5009
I implore anyone defending Biden for this as him having to make a “tough decision” to review the roll calls for the votes on this bill.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1182/vote_118_2_00325.htm
40 Democratic senators voted yes.
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024500
81 Democratic represenatives voted yes.
This anti-trans bill was passed with support from the Democrats. The bourgeoisie political parties of the United States will never protect your human rights, especially when dollars for the military are on the line.
“But the Dems are unable to do helpful things, they just have to approve of horrid bills that actively hurt the people who vote for them!”
“What would the donors think!”
Further cementing both parties as part and parcel to the problems in America.
One wrecks shop, the other apologizes and “hopes” they don’t wreck it more, really really with sugar on top, BLM, 💜💜
I’m not sure what I’m insulted by more, the fascists or the pandering corporate Democrat liars pretending we’re all best friends.
Neither speak for our country. We, the workers, the toilers, the sticks that churn this economy should be the ones speaking for it, not these thieves and grifters.
We need bernie to make this new party
Bernie doesn’t have a ton of tread on his tires.
I like AOC, but I get that half of the country would never vote for her because sassy woman minority, etc.
Now, there is one guy who would never do it, but could get elected in a heartbeat, and would be a firebrand, like Bernie and would likely turn us around.
Jon Stewart.
Don’t like it, vote Dem to keep right wing movements out of DC
If it’s the only option.
But it’s kinda like the Mcgriddle. I don’t even want to be at McDonalds. I’m just taking the best they’ve got.
That’s life, the only way to push the country left, is to keep electing people who can be pushed left. Obama/Biden were against gay marriage in 2008, they legalized it in 2015.
What do you think “pushed left” looks like? Because it’s certainly not a round of handshakes and “I know you tried your best, I’m with you no matter what” when they abandon the issues you care about. This is the pushing.
Brother, I grew up in the 80s through 12 straight years of Republican dominance. Do you wanna what happened during those times?
Incarceration rates skyrocketed due to the war on drugs.
Reagan blamed gays for the aids epidemic.
Corporate money exploding in DC and Republicans blocking every bill to limit downvoting with their super majorities.
The list goes on and on.
Ok? So did I. Reagan is the most significant single cause of many of our problems today. That doesn’t answer the question. What do you think “pushing left” looks like?
Pushing left is the left getting angry at Democrats when they’re abandoned. The far right do it all the time. A lot of incumbents lost their seats for compromising on their shitty issues, but the end result is that the party feared them and went right.
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.
This is literally a result of voting Democratic. It’s a Democratic president signing it and a Democratic senate passing it. If this passed next month you’d have a point.
Don’t like it, vote Dem
A big part of the issue is they need 60 votes on budgets, constitutional amendments, court decision reversals, and removal from court/congress/presidency.
So either you have bipartisanship between moderates and literally satan to cover 99.9% of troops families, or you have the entire government collapse leaving every single troops family without coverage.
The only way out is to give the progressive party 60 votes, but every election cycle we stray further away from that.
Although there is also a way for 34 states to come together and force a constitutional change, but idk if that has ever once happened in all of US History?
What about flipping the script and accusing the Republicans on every avenue that they want the troops to go without coverage, unless they get their bigotry in it too?
Why not accuse them of wanting to deny coverage to all these troops?
The reality is that the Dems are fine with this and never cared about Trans rights past identifying it as relevant to get votes with progressives. Now as it has served its usefullness to them, they discard Trans people, like they will discard other LGBT, ethnic and religious minorities…
Because the election was a month ago and a new congress is about to take over immediately after a recess, at which point Trump will be entering office. Either a bipartisan bill passes now or a conservative one passes after January.
Either a bipartisan bill passes now or a conservative one passes after January.
This is a conservative bill.
Removed by mod
Both conservative parties voted for the anti-trans bill you keep defending. It can be both bipartisan and conservative. That’s what bipartisan has implied for at least a decade.
Its a really bad look to desperately try to remove as much context as possible.
So what is the difference between a bipartisan anti-trans bill and a republican anti-trans bill, if both bills are designed by the Republicans?
Several Republican Amendments were removed from the final version of the bill, including blocking Palestinian Refugees, defunding the Pier in Palestine used to ship necessary aid in, stopping any military academy from engaging in Critical Race Theory, blocking reproductive care reimbursement for military, among many other things.
If you want to read up on it, heres a good SUMMARY
Disagree. The only reason 60 votes are needed is because somebody will filibuster it. So grow a fucking backbone, and call out whichever asshole senator is refusing to fund the troops because he cares more about sticking it to transgender people. Don’t just vote for the thing, don’t focus on getting it passef no matter what, put your fucking foot down and name and shame. Point out that one person is holding up a spending bill worth hundreds of billions of dollars over an objection to a line item that probably costs $100k.
Or better, reform the filibuster. The filibuster is a good thing in concept. The procedural filibuster however means that it now takes 60 votes to pass something instead of 50 and there’s essentially no consequence for that. That was not the intent of the Framers.
If you want to filibuster something, you should have to get up there and read the phone book for hours. It should grind the government to a halt. It should be disruptive to everything, a measure used for only the worst bills.
Some things do automatically require a supermajority, but removing Filibuster right before a Republican Majority is basically giving them complete authority, no?
But even if every single Senate Democrat was on board with the idea, they would still be outnumbered by Republicans for the last 10 years, they’ve only managed to pick majority leaders in that time period because of caucusing with Ind and an occasional VP tiebreaker.
Get 51 D + 2 Ind then I can fully support removing the filibuster.
And, much like most Republicans over the last decade or two or maybe three, you are thinking about what’s good for your agenda in the short-term and not what’s good for the nation in the long-term.
The procedural filibuster is bad for the country. It’s bad for the country when Republicans have a majority, it’s bad for the country when Democrats have a majority. And if the GOP tries to pass something awful, maybe one of our Democrats could grow a backbone and actually filibuster the damn thing.If you think Republicans passing their proposed tax cuts for the rich, gutting benefits, and firing squads for undocumented migrants is good for the country, then you’re not going to convince me of jack shit, pal. That is the power you propose handing them.
All those things would be worthy of a stand-up filibuster.
Yes, you said the filibuster should be gotten rid of. If we got rid of that, the 53 Senate Republicans have the votes to pass these.
smell that bipartisanship.
we should swap the pardon power for line item veto
we should swap the pardon power for line item veto
Yeah. Would be neat watching Democrats make excuses for why only Republicans could use it.
You know, I get that there are problems with the Democrats, I really do. But when a Republican alters a bill to include a massively shitty clause, and the president signs it in place because the alternative is likely people not getting paid, and someone suggests a fix to this shitty behavior in a broken system, you always lean into the response of, “Yep, too bad the Democrats don’t want to do shitty stuff, too.” While consistently ignoring all the rest of it.
It makes me think you might not be discussing this in good faith.
But when a Republican alters a bill to include a massively shitty clause, and the president signs it in place because the alternative is likely people not getting paid
Where do you draw the line?
If a Republican alters a bill to include “outlaw miscegenation among military servicemembers” and the president signs it because the alternative is likely people not getting paid, are you okay with that?
“outlaw miscegenation among military servicemembers”
You sir have sent me to a dictionary. You are hereby awarded one pat to be applied to the back
miscegenation
yeah, up to now I had forgotten that trump has a history of hating black people in particular. I imagine that will errupt pretty soon in some way or another.
Nope, but if he hadn’t signed it the headline would have been “Biden Canceled Christmas for America’s Troops”, which is a large part of the reason the Republicans did this, and the same people who are complaining about him signing would be complaining about him not signing.
And honestly, I think this will be forgotten pretty quickly when Trump and the Republicans start rolling out all kinds of regressive laws, some of which I’m sure will supercede this. And some people here will blame the Democrats for not having run a compelling enough campaign, since personal survival isn’t compelling enough for some people.
I’m glad the president that already lost the election cares more about headlines than his constituents rights.
Three things. You’re surprised the party member is concerned about the optics for headlines affecting his party in a thread entirely about people complaining about the party because of his actions? And what do you think the outcome would be if he hadn’t signed it, when the other party has already repeatedly demonstrated that they’re happy to watch the whole thing burn for headlines? All while happily ignoring my last paragraph where I quite clearly state that I think this little rider will be shortly superceded by other, more expansive laws the Republicans have stated they will do in Project 2025 and Agenda 47 (or whatever Trump decided to call his version of Project 2025).
Oh no, not a bad headline! Think of what that would do to Biden’s reelection chances! 🙄
Do not obey in advance. Democrats, by giving ground here, are laying the groundwork for much worse things that Republicans are going to be able to do in the future. I’m trans and I’m pretty sure I’m going to fucking die, because Democrats would rather sacrifice me to avoid bad headlines.
Ah, the commenter who was dedicated to the loss of the Dems at all costs is now giving advice to the Democratic Party, how wonderful. And blaming the GOP administration that may very well kill her and countless other oppressed demographics, myself included, she helped usher in on the Dems too, how predictable.
By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the Democratic Party is at the same time too strong and too weak, right?
The democratic party is a bourgeoisie party that serves the interests of the ruling class, just like the Republicans. It is irrelevant what you say or do, the outcome of elections is determined by the bourgeoisie of the United States. Democrats have made numerous promises to protect trans people and yet, 121 democrats voted for this bill.
I dunno about weak/strong, but disappointing, lazy, unprincipled, corrupt and feckless? yes.
Ah, the commenter who was dedicated to the loss of the Dems at all costs
You spent the past year saying that about anyone who was in the least upset about genocide.
Democrats chose who they wanted to be shitty to.
This is going to be Democrats’ last word about trans people for a long time.
You’ll have to get 60 votes to make it happen. I’m game, honestly, nobody should be above the law, and precisely for that reason no Republican would ever vote for this.
Stupidity and cowardice. He’s a lame duck; he could’ve gone down swinging and let the next administration take the heat for this. But no, he had to show his true colors.
This will be his legacy. Opening the door wide open to the wolves and supporting the worst genocide since Rwanda. And he deserves it.
I said it before and it bears repeating: he’ll be remembered as a combination of the worst failures of Neville Chamberlain and Paul von Hindenburg.
That’s it. That’s his legacy. Every other aspect of what he did - positive or negative - pales in comparison.
I think he signed this one because the threat of what is coming is much worse. But I do agree, I wish Biden were a better man than he is.
It really is a shame. His administration did a lot of good stuff and ultimately it’s going to be completely overshadowed by his inaction on a few really important issues.
I don’t know if he could’ve prevented the coming disaster, but he sure as fuck could’ve put us in a better position to weather the storm, and he absolutely did not.
Could he have? Even if he takes drastic action (as an official act, of course), it’s not guaranteed things will turn out better.
But at least he’d have tried… history remembers that too.
The number of times the Democrats have said “We couldn’t have won that vote, so we didn’t push the issue” and I’m like, that’s how you change the conversation! You get Congressional candidates on record as opposing this thing that would have helped. You don’t avoid the issue because you’ll lose.
I think the public seeing someone with power actually willing to lead would be a lot more valuable than we think.
I think he signed this one because the threat of what is coming is much worse
I think he signed it because he hates all trans people. After a whole-assed year of supplying a genocide, he gets no benefit of the doubt.
That’s possible. Dude is ancient, and has often been on the wrong side of history. Who knows what he actually believes.
Stupidity and cowardice.
The defining characteristics of the Biden administration and the centrist wing of the Democratic party.
Am I allowed to say that I don’t agree with there being a trans children. And so is the majority of america
Do you mean you wouldn’t allow children to transition? Because there will technically always be trans children.
The difference is whether or not they get nigh irreversible changes by going through puberty and slowly watch their bodies warp into something they’re not, or don’t.
It doesn’t matter if you “agree” with it in the same way that it doesn’t matter if you “agree” with children growing above a certain height. It’s going to occur. Treat them humanely.
Centrist, or Republican?
Me? I’m on the left on 99% of the issues.
The majority of Americans don’t agree they are the morons and yet a majority of Americas are in fact morons.
The next administration wants the government to shut down and grind to a halt. This is all Biden can do to slow the bleeding.
I will never hold my nose to vote democratic ever again. Plus it wouldn’t help, your stench permeates throughout the entire country.
Your time in the sun is over blue conservatives. The same could be said for the country that was in your stewardship.
We trusted you to defeat literal clowns and not only were you incapable, you joined the circus.
You are not to be trusted ever again.
Biden isn’t the worst president ever, but he’s a piece of shit. He was entirely not up to the task of our time, and that was obvious in 2020. His presidency had more to do with fulfilling an old man’s lifelong desire to sit in the big seat, rather than meet the needs of the citizenry. It was basically a make-a-wish project for establishment Democrats who desire gentlemanly order and aggrandizement more than any meaningful policy goals. This was a group project, and all of the self-interested facilitators that covered up his senility (going back before the 2020 race), are directly culpable in the emerging feudal reign that Republicans are orchestrating, as well as the unjust murders of hundreds of thousands of innocents in Gaza. I started his administration feeling weary but cautiously hopeful that we may have averted calamity. I end his administration having lost confidence in not only our government, but of our people. I could not have more contempt for the entire American project and all the hollow sentiments that cloak the inhumanity of it. Biden is such a clown.
He’s literally patting himself for doing the best job he could instead of bowing out sooner.
What a dumb take. If Harris had been in the Presidential seat, she would have lost by more.
Trump’s fear mongering and lies are all that got him elected. Plain and simple. Putting ANY candidate up against a sitting president for re-election that just lies and says fascist bullshit non-stop is a sure winner.
This is not, in general, true, or else everyone would be doing it. Trump is a right-wing populist who’s taking advantage of people’s dissatisfaction with the status quo and the Democrats’ unwillingness to change it. You need both sides for this equation to make sense.
Exactly. The Ds wanted to keep things the way they were, to the point they threw Biden in last minute in 2020 for the Ds to rally around. The Ds had a supermajority with Obama and they did jack shit with it. Unless they abandon the status quo stance they have they will continue to lose, which with Pelosi pushing the old guy over AOC shows they haven’t learned yet and will cling to the way things are until we boot them out with prejudice.
Yes. Neoliberalism fails wherever it is tried, and the US managed to export it across the western world. What’s going on in the US isn’t unique and the same dynamics apply.
Lol, that’s clearly not the take away, but you do you.
It’s absolutely the takeaway. Did you even read your own link? It’s not about “incumbents” it’s about “establishments”.
Mexico also had an aging president who named a younger woman as his successor in a 2024 election, and she won in a landslide. The difference was that Obrador and Sheinbaum are left populist. That is despite the fact that Mexico is less educated, more religious, and more culturally conservative.
Just chiming in to say that if your only counterargument is “lol no,” consider your own stance could be due for reevaluation.
I don’t really strongly agree with either of you, but you’ve thrown in the towel with this bit.
Fuck no. Biden, Harris, and the Democratic consultancy machine did not run a presidency or a campaign that came within a million miles of supporting that claim.
In a populist age, like we are in, what beats right wing populists (fascists) is left wing populists. The Biden presidency nudged the party in that direction, but neither he nor Harris were capable of running a populist campaign.
The Biden presidency nudged the party in that direction,
Well, the Biden administration briefly entertained some left-wing populist positions, which were unceremoniously jettisoned along with any credibility Democrats once had on the subject.
As Biden just did with the now-ridiculous notion that Democrats support trans people.
Biden made serious progress for unions, consumers, and in antitrust. I’m not putting him up for sainthood, but progress is progress. He was the most progressive president of the last 50 years which, sadly, is a super low bar.
Politics is compromise. Biden is not supreme leader of the United States. He shares power with Republicans. The Republicans will get some wins, and every one of them will be ugly and outrageous. If America wanted to support trans people, they should have elected a Democratic House.
Biden made serious progress for unions, consumers
no, he absolutely did not. He just lost an election for being out of touch with consumers, and he ended a rail strike he should have stayed out of, and then followed up with peanuts for the strikers and called it a win. Then when police started busting the amazon strike, he did nothing.
Your understanding of the railroad strike is deeply incomplete. The following is from an IBEW statement.
"We’re thankful that the Biden administration played the long game on sick days and stuck with us for months after Congress imposed our updated national agreement,” Russo said. “Without making a big show of it, Joe Biden and members of his administration in the Transportation and Labor departments have been working continuously to get guaranteed paid sick days for all railroad workers.
Here are 8 Ways the Biden Administration Has Fought for Working People by Strengthening Unions.
Here is an article covering Biden’s consumer protection and anti-trust initiatives. Lina Khan was Biden’s appointee to the FTC, and she did amazing work in her short time in office - even pissing off a lot of Democratic donors.
The Republicans will get some wins, and every one of them will be ugly and outrageous. If America wanted to support trans people, they should have elected a Democratic House.
Our Democratic Senate voted overwhelmingly against trans people.
The Senate doesn’t rule any more than the President. The Senate must also compromise with the House. If America doesn’t want Republicans to influence policy, then America has to stop voting for Republicans.
The real question is, why do Republicans choose to use their leverage on this shit? The answer is simple. It allows them to undermine Democrats by splitting the left. Your reaction is the exact reason why trans people just got screwed. You are personally more responsible than anyone in the Senate.
He should have bowed out of the race and let a primary happen, not resigned as president. I agree, any incumbent was fucked, but Harris didn’t have to run as continuation and someone else entirely could avoid the association even further. Democrats need to play to win, and that includes (selectively) throwing kind uncle Joe under the bus if it helps.
I doubt a primary would have even helped. There was no time for a proper full primary. It would have just been through horse trading at the convention. And that process would have inevitably resulted in another centrist geezer empty suit winning the nomination. Populist firebrands aren’t the type that win such back room contests.
Not left when he did and then have a primary. Never ran for a second term.
There was no time for a proper full primary.
Convenient…
deleted by creator
I guess if there was any doubt before, it’s gone now. Neither party is suitable. Time to really vote progressive. We need a new party that isn’t deeply entrenched with whatever made hime sign that.
Time to do more than voting, comrade. The rule makers will never allow real change within the rules that they create.
Reps took down Roe. Do you count that as “real change”?
Edit: hm. No answer but downvotes.
Agreed, and what we really need is to actually end the duopoly by changing the voting system to a more fairly representative one like ranked-choice or rated, in the first place. Voting third party will just increase the chance of Republicans winning if that third party is left-leaning, and no third party will get a majority vote if you can’t convince the vast majority of Americans to completely change their entire understanding of political parties that they’ve held on to for the past decades.
Just my opinion here, but the primary thing we should focus on is changing voting systems, because that’s what will actually allow us to have a third party be successful in the first place.
Voting systems are extremely hard to change in most states. But progressive candidates usually support voting changes too. So two birds with one stone. It will be a painful few cycles with the Republicans winning. But they have shown they will turn on each other rather fast. And once we show we just aren’t going to vote democrat or republican, momentum will build. Things can’t get much worse.
How exactly do we focus on changing voting systems? Obviously vote for Democrats who support giving power to the people. What if they don’t?
It works best when you start at more local levels.
Many states already require ranked-choice voting, and that makes it easier to get progressive candidates in positions like senator, as well as non-federal state positions. Smaller state elections are much easier to change than the entirety of federal elections, and are often influenced by door knocking campaigns, various charitable organizations, and community organizing.
Hell, this can even be done at the city level. The smaller the elections get, the easier it is to change them. But the more progressive smaller elections get, the easier it is to progressively impact other systems, and then get people in federal positions of power that are open to the idea.
For now, we’re effectively just stuck with what the Democrats are up for if we want any chance at actually having a better voting systems, but working up from local levels can be a very effective way to slowly push the changes on a federal level.
Out of curiosity if I made you choose between:
-
0% of military troops’ families getting salaries and healthcare
-
100% of military troops’ families getting salaries and healthcare with the sole exception of trans care
What would you choose?
Although, honestly, since we’re in hypotheticals and foresight, Biden could have let them go without pay and possibly triggered a Bonus Army type scenario where the military protests.
I expect the party that ran on protecting trans kids to take a stand. But I am done supporting the democrats now.
So you choose 0%, wow thats sick anon.
Anything else is just the illusion of choice. They control the options. So they can always come up with something worse to set next to the option it wants. The only influence you have as a chooser is to call thier bluff. If you don’t you might as well just let have whatever they want.
In this case, I hate to ask more of our service members. But I know I can count on them to fight back. Choosing zero is calling them to service once more to protect the freedom of our nation. Specifically thier freedom to use the benefit they were promised when they enlisted. And I have faith that they will rise to the occasion.
They literally didn’t choose the 0% yet you claim the thing they did actually choose is an illusion?
Now you’re getting it.
Got it, you think yes is no and up is down, lmao
What, do you think Congress would just not pass a NDAA?
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.
Oh no, a protest followed shortly thereafter by a bill that passes presidential veto. And that the Republicans have the power to do whatever they want in January is exactly why this should have been vetoed. They can do whatever evils they want, but at least then it’s on them rather than further eroding the idea that Democrats will stick up for their constituent minority groups.
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?
The “bipartisan bill” doesn’t protect us on anything. There’s nothing stopping them from passing any measure we avoided by accepting the “imperfect” bill, so they don’t need to surrender to Republican priorities when they only control 1/3rd of the current legislative process. They’re going to do the “more harms” regardless of what Democrats do here. Nothing has been averted with this complicity.
Plus my expectation is that a vetoed NDAA doesn’t result in a month with no NDAA until the new Congress. It’s a “must pass” bill. Cancel recess.
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.
-
If only there was some way for him to stop it from happening… Well, Joe, at least you tried.
It’s not like his own opponent did something like that in the past because he didn’t like the text of the bill. Surely not…
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/vetoes/TrumpDJ.htm
God when will people stop falling for this crap, this is exactly the culture war repubs are waging. Half of them don’t even give a crap about shitting on LGBTQ+, what they care about is shitting on the Dems so R’s can stay in power. They put the poison pill in a bill that Biden has no choice but to sign, JUST TO GET HEADLINES LIKE THIS, so that progressives will blame Biden and the democrats instead of the magats. And you fall for it every time. Sure, sometimes you also blame the R’s for actually doing the bad things, but you always blame democrats when they aren’t able to stop R’s from doing the bad things. You all might hate the military but we kind of need one and if we just shut it down we’re leaving ourselves vulnerable. What you are doing by blaming Biden for this is like saying yeah what the rapist did was wrong but she didn’t fight him off hard enough, she must have wanted it. smh
Why didnt the Democrats block this bill and accuse the Republicans of trying to abuse it to pass their bigotry, rather putting millions of people well being on the line?
If you always play the bad game instead of standing up from the table and calling it out, it is because you do like playing the game and you are fine with the consequences.
Of course Democrats called them out on it and tried to pass an amendment to strip it out: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/democrats-stand-up-for-trans-kids-during-senate-debate-on-military-health-care-provision/
My OP point is, stop reacting to click bait headlines in just the way they meant for you to, Actually read enough to get an understanding of what the bills are and what’s in them, what happened during the process they went through, and why various people acted how they did before jumping to conclusions. Stop falling for dirty political tactics designed to keep magats in power and promote their christian nationalist agendas while keeping the rest of us fighting with each other so they can keep getting reelected.
They didn’t fucking stand up for people like me, they capitulated. Biden could have vetoed.
But they still passed it, no? They made the compromise towards bigotry, without getting compromise towards center positions back from the Reps. So step by step the country moves further to the far right, as the Democrats don’t put their heels in and block the move over red lines.
Some Democrats did. The amendment didn’t even get a vote. Biden is a Democrat who very much did not stand up to it.
They put the poison pill in a bill that Biden has no choice but to sign
He could have refused to sign. But that might have violated one of the precious norms that Democrats care more about than trans people.
Tell us you have no idea how the government works without telling us you have no idea how the government works.
Centrists pull out the “you don’t know how government works” gaslighting whenever someone calls them out and they have no actual rebuttal.
Concession accepted.
It’s called facing reality and dealing with it, which isn’t nearly as much fun as mindlessly bashing oversimplified interpretations of click-bait headlines. Sure, it’s nice to play the game online where you pick one issue and ignore all the other issues no matter how important they are, but in the real world you have to do the best you can do. The consequences of vetoing the bill would be huge, while one of the articles posted elsewhere in the comments here[1] talks about the number of children who could be affected and that there are very few circumstances where the provision in the bill would have an impact (e.g. it only disallows treatments that would result in sterilization, which doesn’t include puberty blockers, etc.). But you’re obviously not interested in seriously considering the details and practicalities of the real world situation, just enjoying railing against Biden, so have fun with that.
[1] edit to repost that link: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/senate-passes-military-bill-with-provision-restricting-trans-healthcare/
Being willing to sacrifice the rights and protections of ‘a few’ minorities so that our already inflated military doesn’t face delays in payment is exactly what Biden and the other democrats are being criticized for here.
That you agree that those rights are unimportant isn’t exactly the impassioned defense you think it is
Being willing to sacrifice the rights and protections of ‘a few’ minorities
Democrats aren’t just willing to sacrifice trans people. They’re eager to.
“But protecting minorities just isn’t popular. We’ll never win if we’re too woke.”
Anyone who could vote and says they care about the rights of trans people better have voted for Harris or you have no standing on this issue.
Lmao
“Only people who were able to set aside their moral/ethical objections to genocide are qualified to speak on the topic of standing up for minority rights”
The copium is strong in this one.
I already accepted your concession. You got what you wanted out of this bill. It’s a shame they had to fund the military too, huh?
Removed by mod
Title is quite disingenuous. Doesn’t match content.
Apologies if it seems disingenuous, but if I’d copied the entire original title, it would have been about 30% longer, and it’s already relatively lengthy to begin with.
I did my best to ensure the title of my post matched the relevant content and context of the article and respective event.
We don’t allow editorialized headlines, but I’ll give you a chance to revert it before removing it.
“President Biden Signs Defense Bill Blocking Health Care For Trans Military Children, First Anti-LGBTQ+ Federal Law Enacted Since ‘Defense of Marriage Act’”
Reverted.
Thank you!
Isn’t that the definition of a headline? That someone was editorializing the content?
Summarizing by the OG news editor is fine.
So then all a bad actor would need to do is pick a source that has the headline that manipulates people the way they want to? Ie pick the fox story over MSNBC. Or pick some hate group like fox over hrc.org?
Nope. Bad actor sites like Fox, OANN, Drudge, Breitbart, etc. are also not allowed.
You have a VERY limited list of sites that editorialize their headlines to manipulate readers.
I’m lost. He spoke against it, but signed it anyway. Did they give any rationalization for signing it?
Most of the replies here aren’t giving you a solid answer, though @finitebanjo@lemmy.world was close—so sorry about that.
At one point, the bill text included anti-refugee, anti-CRT, and other controversial provisions that Republicans added, but those were fortunately removed.
However, the anti-trans language was reportedly “slipped in” and didn’t even appear in the bill summary. The bill itself has been described as “must pass,” which means it’s prioritized regardless of what’s in it.
Final takeaway: Bad actors in Congress added the language, and Biden didn’t care enough about trans rights to thoroughly review it.
Sources:
This wasn’t missed. Rights organizations were bringing it up well in advance of voting/signing, and 20-ish senators tried to strip it from the bill. It wasn’t a whoopsie.
didn’t say it was. it was an intentional manipulation of the law, as i wrote above.
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.
No, not enough time to send it back and the R’s knew exactly what they were doing here.
Democrats are willing to go into a government shutdown rather than cave. Biden should have fought harder.
Actually, Biden signed the congressional budget 5 days ago averting Shutdown. Democrats don’t want shutdown, Republicans do.
“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.
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.
The wheels on the bus go thump thump thump
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.
It doesn’t cover their hormone replacement and other trans care, but it still covers all their sickness and injuries.
Look up the suicide rates of trans kids. Health care isn’t just a cosmetic convenience. It’s life saving.
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.
Well as long as the soldiers get their Christmas bonuses, I suppose a few thousand dead children is an acceptable price to pay.
As though Democrats wouldn’t have voted for the anti-trans provision as a standalone bill.
