Toggle sidebar

Trump Policies, part IX

  • HELLO AGAIN, Guest! We are back, live! We're still doing some troubleshooting and maintenance to fix a few remaining issues but everything looks stable now (except front page which we're working on over next day or two)

    Thanks for your patience and support! MUCH appreciated! --Brett (BamaNation)

    if you see any problems - please post them in the Troubleshooting board!

more winning


The cost of living got even more expensive for Americans last month, with prices rising at the fastest pace since the start of the year.

Consumer prices rose 0.3% in September, which drove the annual rate of inflation from 2.9% to 3%, the highest it’s been since January, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data released Friday.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: some_al_fan
CrimsonJazz said:
Nonsense. Contraception has been wholly accepted by the Protestants and Evangelicals. So unless it's the abortion pill topic, it is fine. (And honestly, I'm not sure most people really understand how the so-called "abortion pills" even work.) Sure, we could try to educate people using non-confrontational means, but we don't have time for rational solutions. Everybody knows that facing off on a street corner and hurling stupid insults works so much better.

Also, trying to wipe out voter security and hiding it under the guise of protecting civil rights is a pretty clever idea. Thankfully, most people see right through it. There is only one reason to intentionally lower voting integrity and we all know what it is. Points for trying, though. ;)
Click to expand...
On the contraception side:
It's not nonsense, unless you're a male not paying any attention to the ongoing legal challenges to contraception. Make no mistake, what may seem like innocuous court cases are all part of a well funded and well planned attack on women's right to contraception from a small minority, who are now more likely to win court cases with the current hyper right leaning Supreme Court Justices gleefully ignoring/overturning precedence and refusing to even issue a written ruling for too many recent court cases.

And on the voting rights side:
"Shelby County v. Holder infamously gutted Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, blocking application of a provision that required jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to submit proposed voting changes for preclearance before they could take effect. Other rulings further limited the law’s protections.

The next Supreme Court term could be even more consequential. The justices will soon decide whether to hear an appeal of an Eighth Circuit ruling that held that Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act can only be enforced by the Department of Justice — not by individuals or organizations — a decision that broke with decades of practice and would leave many voters unprotected. The Supreme Court has stayed the Eighth Circuit’s ruling for now.

And in Louisiana v. Callais, the Court will consider a constitutional challenge to a congressional district that was drawn to comply with the law’s requirement that election maps give minority communities an equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. The Court first heard the case in its previous term but then ordered reargument on the constitutionality of the district — a rare move suggesting that the justices could broadly curtail the law’s enforceability or limit the use of race-conscious remedies to respond to violations."

statecourtreport.org

What Happens if the U.S. Supreme Court Guts the Voting Rights Act?

State provisions could help fill a voting rights gap, but they are a poor substitute for a strong federal standard.
statecourtreport.org statecourtreport.org


Cases challenging access and coverage
  • Braidwood v. Becerra:
    A case before the Supreme Court threatens the Affordable Care Act's requirement that insurers cover preventive care, including birth control, without a copay.


State-level legislative and legal challenges
  • State-level restrictions:
    Some state lawmakers have attempted to block "Right to Contraception Acts," which would protect birth control access.

  • Project 2025:
    This initiative seeks to undermine the ACA's birth control benefit, potentially allowing employers to opt out of providing it and making it harder for individuals to access or learn about contraception.
 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: some_al_fan, Huckleberry and 92tide
75thru79 said:
Where are the eligible voters (US citizens only please) that are being denied their voting rights? I may be mistaken but I believe this last presidential election set records for turnout. Everyone that wants to vote can do so, either in person, or via the US mail, in every state in the Union. No one gets turned away except people that go to the wrong place or don't bring an ID (if their state requires it).
Click to expand...
Even if you can vote, it doesn't mean you and your neighbors can elect someone who will actually represent you or your race/group. That's what a massive part of the Voting Rights Act was about: allowing minority groups to have representation for them. Before the 1960s, you had almost zero black congresspersons going all the way back to the Reconstruction days, because of cracking, packing etc. of voting districts to eliminate any voting block power. Now we are looking at unfettered Gerrymandering, which is out of control and seriously undermines not only minority voting rights, but elects hyper partisan politicians with little the voting population seem to be able to do about it due to their electors stacking the races full of their voters to ensure victory.

A great solution is ranked choice voting and instant runoffs, that is until the parties figure out how to game those as well.

Further reading if you want to be informed.

www.archives.gov

Voting Rights Act (1965)

EnlargeDownload Link Citation: An act to enforce the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States and for other purposes, August 6, 1965; Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of Congress, 1789-; General Records of the United States Government; Record Group 11; National Archives View All...
www.archives.gov www.archives.gov

 
  • Thank You
  • Like
Reactions: Huckleberry and 92tide
  • Like
  • Thank You
Reactions: 92tide, Bamaro and Huckleberry
So who on here actually believes the Republicans will negotiate in good faith on extending the Healthcare tax credits if the Democrats will only agree to reopen the government first?
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: 92tide
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back