HR 1 urgently needs to pass through filibuster

[woolfe9998]

HR 1:

For the People Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Requires states to offer same day voter registration, can have voter ID laws but must accept a sworn affidavit of identity in the alternative, must allow all persons to receive vote by mail ballot upon request. Election day is a federal holiday. And several more provisions to expand voting rights.

Also, this may be the best part: all states must do re-districting through a commission consisting of 5 democrats, 5 republicans, and 5 independents. This could be the end of partisan gerrymandering.

Already passed the House in 2019, been sitting on McConnell's desk ever since.

And if you needed any further convincing, the repugs are frothing at the mouth over it, using apocalyptic rhetoric, claiming it will be the end of America. Gee, what are they so afraid of?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-rhetoric-on-hr-1-is-apocalyptic-are-they-that-afraid-of-democracy/2021/03/04/22410f0c-7d2b-11eb-a976-c028a4215c78_story.html

Write your Senator. They must end the filibuster at least for the limited purpose of passing this bill. It is more important than the stimulus bill and any other conceivable piece of legislation they could pass. It would be the signature achievement of the Biden administration, and of the democratic party for a generation.

 

[HomerJS]

God forbid we set minimum standards of access to all eligible people to the polls.

We must stop stop Republican efforts at voter suppression and further into minority rule.

Remember, they have already been busted in court racially gerrymandering districts.

 

[shortylickens]

this wont pass.
Republicans love their vote suppression, its the only way they can win.

 

[cytg111]

What about this one

If they cant get the R's on board, is this the end of the filibuster?
Will some GQP'ers get on board if they smell this is in the air?

Kamala Harris breaks 50-50 tie to begin Senate debate on $1.9T stimulus

Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday broke a 50-50 Senate tie to begin debate on President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill. Debate on the bill, which would grant $1,400 stimulus chec…

nypost.com

 

[ch33zw1z]

Thanks, emails reps today

 

[dank69]

What about this one

If they cant get the R's on board, is this the end of the filibuster?
Will some GQP'ers get on board if they smell this is in the air?

Kamala Harris breaks 50-50 tie to begin Senate debate on $1.9T stimulus

Vice President Kamala Harris on Thursday broke a 50-50 Senate tie to begin debate on President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill. Debate on the bill, which would grant $1,400 stimulus chec…

nypost.com

It better be. If the Dems can't find the stones to end the filibuster, stick a fork in us. R's will NOT cave on HR-1. They would sooner burn the country to the ground.

 

[cytg111]

It better be. If the Dems can't find the stones to end the filibuster, stick a fork in us. R's will NOT cave on HR-1. They would sooner burn the country to the ground.

If so, that's excellent news IMO.
Next up the SC.
I'd say all in all, right now things be heading in the right direction.

 

[HomerJS]

It better be. If the Dems can't find the stones to end the filibuster, stick a fork in us. R's will NOT cave on HR-1. They would sooner burn the country to the ground.

We already know they are willing to kill cops to thwart democracy

 

[Zorba]

If so, that's excellent news IMO.
Next up the SC.
I'd say all in all, right now things be heading in the right direction.

They haven't don't shit yet. Have to kill the filibuster.

 

[compcons]

HR 1:

For the People Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

... It is more important than the stimulus bill and any other conceivable piece of legislation they could pass. It would be the signature achievement of the Biden administration, and of the democratic party for a generation.

This is totally true. However, people are stupid in general and the "economy" (or whatever money they have ) will be more important to them and define how they view the administration. First they need to get the stimulus bill done and checks in the mail. Then they can work on this legislation and get another stimulus of some sort to appear in mailboxes just before the mid-terms. That's how this should be played. It is not about what is best but what people want. Obama's greatest failure was not rallying the party around making the economy look fantastic but instead putting efforts on something "divisive" (who knew?) like paying for health care.

 

[dank69]

This is totally true. However, people are stupid in general and the "economy" (or whatever money they have ) will be more important to them and define how they view the administration. First they need to get the stimulus bill done and checks in the mail. Then they can work on this legislation and get another stimulus of some sort to appear in mailboxes just before the mid-terms. That's how this should be played. It is not about what is best but what people want. Obama's greatest failure was not rallying the party around making the economy look fantastic but instead putting efforts on something "divisive" (who knew?) like paying for health care.

The problem was the ACA didn't actually pay for healthcare for most people, and even if it technically slowed the pace of healthcare inflation, that aint enough to bury the GOP. If they want to bury the GOP they need to get a public option done, at the very least, and they need to get it done yesterday.

I have my doubts about how effective a public option will be since I think hospitals/pharma/private insurance will unite to keep their stranglehold on the nation, but WTF do I know. Maybe it will turn out to be enough of a saving grace to get us to M4A. Regardless, it needs to get done NOW so it can kick in next year. Any later than that and they risk a bloodbath during the midterms. People need to feel the benefits long before election day rolls around. The FUD machine is too powerful.

 

[K1052]

HR1 seems like the most likely candidate for modified filibuster rules that will enable passage. Yea, Manchin and Sinema won't entirely junk the filibuster but they could sign on to a rule change that enables passage for this and certain other pieces of legislation. Certainly possible to argue that votes on stuff like voting rights and statehood shouldn't be subject to the same rules. The Biden admin also considers this a top priority distinct from everything else.

 

[cytg111]

They haven't don't shit yet. Have to kill the filibuster.

I know... but the winds... winds of change... Its in the air

 

[brycejones]

Someone said the quiet part out loud during oral arguments before SCOTUS this week:

“A significant moment during virtual arguments came when Arizona GOP lawyer Michael Carvin connected the validity of the Republican-backed laws to the party’s interest in winning elections. When asked by Barrett what the state Republican Party’s interest in the case was, he replied: ‘Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats.’”

 

[dank69]

Someone said the quiet part out loud during oral arguments before SCOTUS this week:

“A significant moment during virtual arguments came when Arizona GOP lawyer Michael Carvin connected the validity of the Republican-backed laws to the party’s interest in winning elections. When asked by Barrett what the state Republican Party’s interest in the case was, he replied: ‘Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats.’”

That isn't the quiet part. The quiet part would be to say "it removes our unfair and unconstitutional advantages."

 

[Greenman]

Someone said the quiet part out loud during oral arguments before SCOTUS this week:

“A significant moment during virtual arguments came when Arizona GOP lawyer Michael Carvin connected the validity of the Republican-backed laws to the party’s interest in winning elections. When asked by Barrett what the state Republican Party’s interest in the case was, he replied: ‘Because it puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats.’”

That's a valid argument. Political partisanship isn't a crime, or even bad thing at times. HR1 as written will absolutely favor democrats.
There are parts of the bill I like, and parts that I don't like. Overall I see the negatives as outweighing the positives, so it's my hope that it's killed in the senate.

 

[Fenixgoon]

That's a valid argument. Political partisanship isn't a crime, or even bad thing at times. HR1 as written will absolutely favor democrats.
There are parts of the bill I like, and parts that I don't like. Overall I see the negatives as outweighing the positives, so it's my hope that it's killed in the senate.

So by making it easier for everyone to vote, this creates an unfair advantage for democrats how, exactly?
As opposed to say..dropping the number of ballot locations in a major city from 180 to 5. Because reasons.

Perhaps republicans should change their policy to get more people to vote for them, instead of trying to stop people from voting altogether.

 

[shortylickens]

That's a valid argument. Political partisanship isn't a crime, or even bad thing at times. HR1 as written will absolutely favor democrats.

Thats because it supports the people, not the corporations.

 

[pauldun170]

That's a valid argument. Political partisanship isn't a crime, or even bad thing at times. HR1 as written will absolutely favor democrats.
There are parts of the bill I like, and parts that I don't like. Overall I see the negatives as outweighing the positives, so it's my hope that it's killed in the senate.

What specific sections of the bill do you have a problem with?
Can you point me to the specific text in the bill that you see as a negative?

Text - H.R.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

Text for H.R.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

www.congress.gov

 

[K1052]

That's a valid argument. Political partisanship isn't a crime, or even bad thing at times. HR1 as written will absolutely favor democrats.
There are parts of the bill I like, and parts that I don't like. Overall I see the negatives as outweighing the positives, so it's my hope that it's killed in the senate.

This is exceedingly vague. HR1 may benefit Democrats but that's not entirely or exclusively the case since Dem gerrymanders would also be at risk. Preservation of Republican structural advantages at all costs is eventually a loosing game for everyone.

 

[soundforbjt]

What specific sections of the bill do you have a problem with?
Can you point me to the specific text in the bill that you see as a negative?

Text - H.R.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

Text for H.R.1 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): For the People Act of 2021

www.congress.gov

Whatever Fox told him, even if it’s false or an alternative fact.

 

[HomerJS]

HR1 seems like the most likely candidate for modified filibuster rules that will enable passage. Yea, Manchin and Sinema won't entirely junk the filibuster but they could sign on to a rule change that enables passage for this and certain other pieces of legislation. Certainly possible to argue that votes on stuff like voting rights and statehood shouldn't be subject to the same rules. The Biden admin also considers this a top priority distinct from everything else.

Just change the filibuster to a real one. No more phoning it in. Let some Republican stand up for 24 hours and preach to us why Republicans should be allowed to disenfranchise black people. Also if they veer off topic you lose the stage. No rambling on about Trump having his election stolen.

 

[K1052]

Just change the fillibuster to a real one. No more phoning it in. Let some Republican stand up for 24 hours and preach to us why Republicans should be allowed to disenfranchise black people. Also if they vere off topic you lose the stage. No rambling on about Trump having his election stolen.

A talking filibuster would be a return to tradition.

 

[MrSquished]

That's a valid argument. Political partisanship isn't a crime, or even bad thing at times. HR1 as written will absolutely favor democrats.
There are parts of the bill I like, and parts that I don't like. Overall I see the negatives as outweighing the positives, so it's my hope that it's killed in the senate.

So more people being able to vote more easily, especially poorer minorities who have to wait in line the longest or often can't travel to distant polling places, favors democrats, and that is not ok with you. Better off to suppress their votes it seems.

Political partisanship by strangling the wheels of democracy by targeting certain groups ability to vote should be a crime, but you are clearly ok for it here. You are simply for suppressing the most fundamental act of democracy, the act of voting, in a targeted manner, to favor one party over the other - the lawyer said the quiet part out loud and you are onboard with it since you overall oppose this bill. And that makes you a terrible person.

 

[compcons]

The problem was the ACA didn't actually pay for healthcare for most people, and even if it technically slowed the pace of healthcare inflation, that aint enough to bury the GOP. If they want to bury the GOP they need to get a public option done, at the very least, and they need to get it done yesterday.

I have my doubts about how effective a public option will be since I think hospitals/pharma/private insurance will unite to keep their stranglehold on the nation, but WTF do I know. Maybe it will turn out to be enough of a saving grace to get us to M4A. Regardless, it needs to get done NOW so it can kick in next year. Any later than that and they risk a bloodbath during the midterms. People need to feel the benefits long before election day rolls around. The FUD machine is too powerful.

The specifics about the ACA are not important at all. It was just to highlight that the Dems spent two years doing the right thing and trying to pass useful legislation and it was simple for the Republicans to spin it into evil which cost the Dems the mid-terms. First move must be to make the people happy. That is how you win mid-terms. Put a bunch of money in people's pockets first and secure the mid-terms. Getting on TV and telling the masses that Dems are bad because they put money in their pockets won't be easy (though they will try).

Spending time passing legislation to ensure democracy is safe while sacrificing the popularity of money is another foolish endeavor. It's really easy for a Republican to start talking about unfair elections and vote stealing. Pass stimulus, set up second stimulus for 2022, THEN pursue fixing the screwed up system that allows a party to hold office while only getting a minority of the votes. This is not rocket science. This is the crap the Republicans are good at. They dumped a really bad tax reform into our laps and people loved getting a few more bucks every month. Time to take the page form the play book.