New senators and representatives are slightly cheaper than the existing ones, although with a fixed size of 100 and 435 it's not highly variable.
And fixing the house at the size it was a century ago when the country was a third its current population contributed to the house.not being responsive.
Things are better in other countries, but this particular lie is almost universal, as are the "solutions": bashing minorities & slashing funding for social services to keep the gen pop entertained, while the money flows to projects rich people benefit from.
The article's topic is more ideological though; the Trump admin's continued efforts to eliminate anything LGBTQ+.
I wonder when the day will come that a judge sees shit like this and decides anything saying woman or man should be included, just to legally fuck with the Administration. Imagine someone trying to deny healthcare or something else for trans individuals and they learn they wrote something that is legally interpreted as including CIS women and men. I’d like to see the moment that backfire occurs.
9 Comments
BigMacHole@thelemmy.club · 57 pts · 81d
ELIMINATING Healthcare for Veterans is how we SUPPORT the Veterans!
-Republicans LITERALLY!
ActualGrapesTasteGreen@piefed.zip · 17 pts · 81d
If we're so tight on funds, maybe we shouldn't be hiring so many new Congress people?
DomeGuy@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 81d
New senators and representatives are slightly cheaper than the existing ones, although with a fixed size of 100 and 435 it's not highly variable.
And fixing the house at the size it was a century ago when the country was a third its current population contributed to the house.not being responsive.
A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip · 6 pts · 81d
Things are better in other countries, but this particular lie is almost universal, as are the "solutions": bashing minorities & slashing funding for social services to keep the gen pop entertained, while the money flows to projects rich people benefit from.
The article's topic is more ideological though; the Trump admin's continued efforts to eliminate anything LGBTQ+.
hopesdead@startrek.website · 8 pts · 81d
I wonder when the day will come that a judge sees shit like this and decides anything saying woman or man should be included, just to legally fuck with the Administration. Imagine someone trying to deny healthcare or something else for trans individuals and they learn they wrote something that is legally interpreted as including CIS women and men. I’d like to see the moment that backfire occurs.
dan1101@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 81d
So they're veterans, they served their country, but they just happen to be non-cis. Coverage denied.
Next are they going to deny coverage for people that don't like UFC? For anyone who voted Democrat? Make it make sense.
CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 80d
It's about hurting the people they are supposed to be hurting.
athatet@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 80d
Exactly. The cruelty is the point.
The_Wumpus@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 81d
Good luck in the midterms