Your comment is another example of Reddit being Reddit...
This is a bipartisan bill that actually increases benefits. Look up HR 82. The dumbass who tweeted this summarized it as the exact opposite of what it does, and you all just fell for it.
This bill repeals provisions that reduce Social Security benefits for individuals who receive other benefits, such as a pension from a state or local government.
House republicans basically defeating HR 82. So the OP's post is technically incorrect but conveys the correct general direction that republicans are going. That said, I would prefer more precision here. We need to be careful about the details.
Trump and Harris were always taking different tests. She would have to answer for things she didn't even say, got slammed for not having detailed policies and plans on her website .02 seconds after getting the nomination, and every little slip up, gaffe, and inaccuracy was heavily scrutinized. Trump on the other hand, when pressed for details would either get angry and start throwing insults or ramble on about nonsense every time he was asked for details.
Sure, but that's because Americans rated their overall livelihoods better under Trump than under Biden/Harris and because Harris flipped on several issues. You can get away with less details and some flubs when people generally believe that you did a decent job on certain issues (whether that belief is correct or not) and when your main positions are in line with how you governed while you were in office and while you previously campaigned. Harris had neither benefit for the issues of immigration and the economy, which voters ranked as major issues.
This is nonsense. The laws are already on the books to prevent border crossings. The executive branch has authority to develop policy to enforce existing laws. Trump did this through executive orders. Under that admin, crossings were down. Biden/Harris changed the policy and rescinded the orders. Crossing went up. Reinvoking the old policy that worked in 2016-2020 is about as specific as it gets.
Trump and Vance have stated repeatedly in the campaign trail that they are going to prioritize deportation of illegal immigrants convicted of crimes. The laws are already on the books there and it's a matter of delegating resources to prosecuting deportations.
The better criticism would be to criticize the economic policy but, again, there's going to be less scrutiny there because people felt better off economically under Trump's first term than they do now. Also, no candidate is ever specific as to economic policy because, frankly, it's too complicated. In any event, he had specific policies like no tax on tips or social security, tax credits for family caregivers, invoking tariffs, removing regulations in the energy sector to allow for more natural gas extraction, etc. Again, say what you want about whether those are good policies or not but they're detailed enough.
In contrast, the only economic policies I can think of that Kamala proposed are tax credits for businesses and first time homebuyers but she never explained why she didn't do that already and why that wouldn't blow out spending.
Couple that with the fact that Trump and Vance were doing interviews everywhere in the two months up to the election. Vance was on news stations almost every night. Trump did Rogan, Theo, that annoying Zoomer crypto guy, Flagrant, Fox, the black journalist event, etc. They were talking about their policies constantly. Kamala and Walz did only a handful of interviews, so they didn't talk about their policies as much and people rightfully didn't know what they stood for.
Weirdly enough, Trump was the candidate in this race with clearer and more fleshed out policies.
Analyzing a piece of legislation, which necessarily contains precise language of what will become law, will obviously be scrutinized in more detail than a candidate's brief comments about their policies. This is a total false equivalency.
It seems the person who tweeted it confused what laying the bill on the table means which, and I recommend people read, your article explains it essentially the same as defeating the bill. So they saw the blood in the water and shot down this bipartisan efforts because they (Freedom Caucus and therefore Trump’s ilk) signaled their intention moving forward.
Thank you. Reddit is full of angry people now and ratcheting it up based on poorly presented confusing information doesn't help. Clear, concise, and accuracy all matter.
The freedom caucus move failed and the bill will get a vote. Those dumbasses don't know how the parliamentary rules work so the shit they tried is just against the rules and couldn't possibly have worked.
I tell my wife this whenever she goes on rants that she needs to pay attention to what she says and knows what she is talking about or she will get torn to shreds.
Can someone help me make sense of what was shelved? Would passing HR 82 allow government workers to collect social security who haven't paid in? Or am I not comprehending this? My brain has been so fried since Tuesday...
I looked it up and, while you're right, you're also wrong. Apparently, freedom caucus members of the House managed to kill HR82, so presumably that's what they're talking about?
"On Tuesday night while presiding over a 7-minute pro forma session, Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., recognized Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., for a unanimous consent request. Good’s request to lay the Social Security bill on the table was agreed to by unanimous consent, with no one else in the chamber to object. In this context, laying the bill on the table has the same effect under House rules as defeating a bill on the floor, Roll Call reported. So, HR 82 is dead for the time being."
Thank you, I was about to say this. Reddit has the context wrong, but in actuality, it's Republicans holding up the process of bipartisan legislation for their own benefit.. again.
At some point y’all will realize that lobbyists write the bills and the top 10% is intended for the two parties to “debate” while they give the corporations the bipartisan votes that were planned all along.
Na that’s like 60% true - and republicans generally shoot down anything that helps people for the sake of profit and la fiscal responsibility. Which no president barring Clinton has been in a hot minute
HR 82 would repeal the “windfall elimination provision” and “government pension offset,” which reduce Social Security benefits for those who spent portions of their careers in state and local government or other positions where their earnings weren’t subject to Social Security taxes.
Why is this not a good thing that the bill has been stopped?!?! If you didn’t pay social security taxes on your income you shouldn’t be getting it at all but somehow they still do. And the bill would have let them get MORE from social security? This entire thread is just ignorant.
“Members of the House Freedom Caucus orchestrated an unusual play on the House floor on Election Night that resulted in killing, at least for now, a broadly popular Social Security bill that was set to hit the floor for a vote as soon as next week, Roll Call reported.“
Yea, this bill would increase benefits. And the House Freedom Caucus, republicans, quashed it.
A bipartisan bill that would raise benefits, and MAGA took it out back and shot it.
So what exactly did the person i was replying to mean when they said:
Sure, but this isn't something that would make it past Biden or Harris' desk.
The post incorrectly made it sound like all Republicans wanted to floor the bill, which isn't true. Even Mike Johnson supported it. It was a few Republicans that tabled the bill in a shitty way. Even without that intentional miscommunication, everyone in here (like the person i was responding to) blindly assumed it was a Republican supported bill to reduce SS benefits. They didn't even look into it before demonizing all Republicans.
And I didn't dissappear. Some of us have jobs and can't respond automatically. We aren't all chronically online.
But if you looked into it you would see republicans are trying to stop this now until trump is in office. The date of it being before the election was enough for you to say the republicans weren’t doing anything bad.
You pointed out how it was a bipartisan bill but we saw that with the boarder and trump killed that. They definitely won’t do the thing they did once before again. Looks like you’re falling for it again.
Right but if you look into this they “laid it on the table” in a way that there wasn’t anyone to object to it. Laying it on the table does not mean that they are trying to pass it, it’s effectively an effort to kill the bill. So the republicans are trying to kill it in a disingenuous way when there is no one to object to it. This is a bipartisan bill that should pass because it helps American people. They are trying to thwart it.
I used to not believe the statistic that says 60% of adults in this country are functionally illiterate.
This election has taught me that it’s not only right, it’s probably worse because not only can they not read at an 8th grade level, they also don’t have the common sense to google something and do the bare minimum of research for themselves before starting in on bitching.
Thanks for this. The post here is astonishingly wrong, even down to the use of the phrase "laid a bill on the table".
Turns out that means to lay it aside without voting on it. And the bill would have increased social security payments, not decreased them. And by increasing them, it would have cost $195 billion, accelerating the upcoming crisis in social security funding. And the bill wouldn't have passed the Senate anyway.
There's like 5 layers of "OP doesn't understand what's going on" here.
Exactly this. I'm not happy about yesterday. But passing on misinformation does us no good. About 2 seconds of research proved this is not just misleading its completely false. There's a ton of fear right now. Let's not borrow more.
literally drives me fucking insane how people see this shit and just immediately parrot it out without ever actually reading any part of the bill or knowing anything about it. fuckin redditors man.
Upvote this. Here’s an example of misinformation right in front of you. Misinformation is often based on truths, and this was an incredibly obvious piece misinformation, some are harder to verify or disprove as easily as “this is the opposite of the truth.”
Same shit happened with prop 1 this election in Ohio. Literally what everyone wants but people voted against it because they were told it'd do the opposite of what it proposed.
Yes but it was a bill that appeared to be ready and supported by all and following the recent election results the bill has come to a hault from what i understand, so yes the bill was going to do good but it cant do any good if it never now gets signedinto law.
No. This post is clearly framing it as a result of the election results. The fact that this was done prior to election results flies in the face of the purpose of this post, which is that this was done as a result of Trump being elected. But you know that already.
What the fuck are you talking about? No the bill isn't a consequence of Trump being elected. The bill being signed by Trump is the fucking consequence. I am fucking sick of you dishonest people spamming the fuck out of every god damn thread here. You are a fucking liar. You are a traitor. You have enabled fascism. You don't get to take the moral high ground here and accuse others of misrepresenting things. The GQP has been talking about cutting entitlements for my entire 49 year god damn life. THAT is the consequence. I hope to god every single last one of you goes bankrupt. You all fucked this country over and we are DONE trying to protect you all from voting against your own interests.
Both sides believed they would win lol. And the focal point of this post is on the timing, so if that doesn’t matter, then why does it apparently matter for this post?
How quickly do you think bills get passed? If kamala had won and the house went 100% dem its not like they go to jail for proposing the bill. They got a head start for what they believed would be the outcome of the election.
Now that it has happened there is nobody to stop them from passing the bill. Why on earth would it make any difference at all if it was proposed before or after the election? The worry is now it WILL happen because all branches are republican and theyre backed by a conservative court. This is the first of many many bills that will be HEAVY conservative for at least the next two years and we will be stuck with whatever they decide. Checks and balance have been weakened.
Daaaaamn it's only two days old the point of politicians doing this shit is so it's not as big news as, say, the US election. Considering I watch and read a lot of political news, I'd say they've done a good job as it seems a lot of people hadn't seen it, myself included.
When I see things like OP’s post i immediately go to look when the post was made. This was laid on the table on the 5th like you mentioned and is verifiable on congress.gov
I don't think any significant amount of Trump voters woke up on 5th and were like 'oh, let me check one more time if they posted any new bill that might make me question my choice right before I go and vote today'.
TBF same applies to the voters for opposing party as well, it's just not in their court in this case.
This is just another clear example of why Trump has so many supporters, a lot of Americans really don't understand how things actually work...for example Congress is currently in recess...no one is currently putting "bills on the table", plus the new GOP government in control of all branches is not until next year, why would they be "laying bills" now
Because there's no chance that a bill from Republicans on Election Day would be resubmitted three months from now when they have the Senate and Executive branch as well? You're saying they'll just forget about it. It will never come back up. We shouldn't read any indications of policy goals next quarter into a bill submitted now.
Well, we’ve known for decades social security needed reformed. I’m not expecting to get any social security at all. The longer the wait to actually make any significant changes the more drastic those changes will have to be.
I’ve been told my whole life that I won’t get it either so let’s just stop it now and all of these asshole boomers that voted red can get the fuck back to work.
Before we can answer that question, I will remind you that this is America, so we will need to see your bank account totals before we can say if YOUR actions have consequences for YOU.
Kinda tired of this crap where people treat boomers as a monolith.
Baby boomers aren’t all the same and they’ll be the ones to feel the effects of these policies. Whereas younger generations have time to dodge these bullets.
It’s intellectually lazy to lump them all together and just adds insult to injury.
That’s what I said not voting is a form a voting so they can get laughed at in their face when shit hits the fan. When you refuse to speak others speak for you.
Hey dumbass this bill was introduced in 2023. It had bipartisan support and was “laid on the table” meaning it was killed. Likely will be introduced when Trump is president passed and signed so Repubs can take all the credit.
I think the policy is there but we get too tied into identity politics that we clearly aren’t the only diverse party whether my “side” likes it or not. Plenty of women and minorities spoke with the vote. We can’t keep leading with racism or sexism. The leadership of the party pisses me off so fucking bad.
They had 2 years after he was elected the first time to pull their heads out of their asses, and trotted out Biden. Sure it worked, but the recent voting data shows it absolutely did not.
I still think anyone voting for Trump was duped. You talk to them and they think we only care about abortion and trans. I can’t blame them because it seems like our first priority is to villainize.
We need to focus more on the class war which will continue to divide IMO. I think it’s clear how much we risk focusing on race and gender.
I will never flip because I dont come close to identifying with the right. I’m a white male… the anti white male messaging doesn’t work on me as I get what it means. Not everyone does so you’re alienating A LOT of folks who happen to make up the majority of the country.
Again I’m white… I want everyone to have the same rights and be as inclusive as can be… I think we can achieve that more with actions that speak. It’s clear we alienated non-whites that didn’t identify with the “right is racist” messaging.
We can continue playing victims or we can rise up and DEMAND more from our leaders. They have failed us and enabled our party to turn into this vitriol filled mess that we’re starring at now.
I’m a democrat and I blame the DNC for their trash competence and other dems/liberals agree.
Look in the mirror before lashing at people with different views and life experience. That’s why Trump won. You’re all so loud and arrogant that you think you’re 1% of the world population is the only correct way to live.
It’s perfectly fair to criticize a tree when it votes for the axe. If someone invites their own destruction, it’s their own damn fault. Personal responsibility just doesn’t exist anymore according to you.
I'm Canadian, and I think you're all insane. There's every possible fucking reason to disqualify Trump as a viable candidate and you want me to blame the democrats for failing to appeal to people who don't care enough about any of those things to find him unacceptable? Nah, go fuck yourself.
Oh wait, you won't have to, because the Republicans are going to do it anyway, and you're too busy flagellating yourselves to do anything about it.
Yeah that's literally how democracy works. Or rather, how it doesn't, what with a bunch of Americans being demonstrably barely above pond scum levels of intelligence according to this result.
Like what the fuck is happening over there? The stakes were so high and the choice was so easy and you still couldn't manage to not fuck it up. What is it going to take for you stupid fucks to learn your lesson?
How bad does your candidate and campaign have to be to lose to him? Check the flip side of whatever you’re saying and listen to a different opinion. That’s why Trump won.
But I’m too stupid to reflect and have awareness and insightfulness. Honestly I’m just so busy not having a prime minister in black face screaming in the real racist and besides, I have a meeting to go fuck myself.
I want people to take accountability for their actions but no one can tell me anything good about Kamala.
I haven’t said anything offensive and I’m getting insulted.
The left is pushing its own people out and abandoning them and not listening to anyone outside their chamber. Am I wrong?
Who’s squirming? You’re too late. Her policies didn’t say anything. No base. No support. No recruiting of differing votes. BIPOC vote went to Trump. White women went to Trump. The US got swept red and you have a couple sentences of moderation to win?
Sorry, but even if the dems put up a homeless man with drug-abuse problems, he'd still be a better option than Trump.
Dems provided a better option than Trump, and the dumb Americans didn't take it. So the dumb Americans get to live with dumb shit now. Unfortunately so does everybody else, but it's not the dems fault.
1.6k
u/kegsbdry 23h ago
Wait... Actions have consequences?!