this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
186 points (97.4% liked)

News

23311 readers
3670 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Legislation has next to no chance of passing but Democrats hope to show Republicans are not serious about solving border issue

Senate Democrats on Thursday will force a second vote on a bipartisan border security bill that Republicans blocked earlier this year at Donald Trump’s behest.

The legislation has next to no chance of passing the chamber, but Democrats hope the attempt will strengthen their argument that Republicans are not serious about addressing the situation at the US border with Mexico, an issue that polls show is a top concern among voters – and one of Joe Biden’s biggest political liabilities.

“Our bipartisan border bill represented a real chance – in fact, the best chance in decades – to act on border security, to make a law and not just to make a political point,” Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer said on Wednesday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is correct. The 60 vote threshold is to break a filibuster. Filibusters having become steadily more common since they changed the procedures for them that removed the requirement for a filibustering Senator to actually stand up and talk the whole time, which put a functional, biological cap on the potential duration of a filibuster. That cap no longer exists. This is sometimes called a "no-talk filibuster".

[–] zigmus64@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

When the fuck did that happen? That’s part of the point of a filibuster… does dude man (or dudette woman) have the fucking stones to see it through? Do they have the conviction of purpose in opposition to the motion to do what it takes to prevent it?

[–] Carrolade@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Looks like 1975.

Seems it was an inadvertent result from a rule designed to allow the Senate to pursue other business during a filibuster, so it wouldn't hold up all Senate business.

Here's a couple links, and there's also a long wikipedia article on it.

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/filibustering-in-the-modern-senate https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/filibuster-explained

[–] zigmus64@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Wow… so my entire life. Appreciate the info.