this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
67 points (100.0% liked)

electoralism

22235 readers
311 users here now

Welcome to c/electoralism! politics isn't just about voting or running for office, but this community is.

Please read the Chapo Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.

Shitposting in other comms please!

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/23689

US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Wednesday demanded the removal of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller—a key architect of President Donald Trump's violent mass deportation campaign—as well as concrete reforms in exchange for any new funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

In remarks on the Senate floor, Sanders (I-Vt.) called ICE a "domestic military force" that is "terrorizing" communities across the country. The senator pointed specifically to the agency's ongoing activities in Minnesota and Maine, where officers have committed horrific—and deadly—abuses.

Sanders said that "not another penny should be given" to ICE or Customs and Border Protection (CBP) "unless there are fundamental reforms in how those agencies function—and until there is new leadership at the Department of Homeland Security and among those who run our immigration policy." The senator has proposed repealing a $75 billion ICE funding boost that the GOP approved last summer, an end to warrantless arrests, the unmasking of ICE and CBP agents, and more.

"To be clear, Kristi Noem and Stephen Miller must go," Sanders said Wednesday, condemning the administration's attempts to smear Renee Good and Alex Pretti, US citizens who were killed this month by federal agents in Minneapolis.

Watch Sanders' full remarks, which placed ICE atrocities in the context of Trump's broader "movement toward authoritarianism":

Sanders' speech came as the Senate is weighing a package of six appropriation bills that includes a DHS bill with over $64 billion in funding—with $10 billion earmarked for ICE. Democrats have called for separating the DHS measure from the broader package and pushed reforms to ICE as a condition for passage.

Punchbowl reported Thursday morning that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and the Trump White House are "negotiating a framework to pass five of the six outstanding FY2026 funding bills, as well as a stopgap measure for the Department of Homeland Security," ahead of a possible government shutdown at the end of the week.

"Under this framework, Congress would pass a short-term DHS patch to allow for negotiations to continue over new limits on ICE and CBP agents as they implement President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown," the outlet added. "If Schumer and the White House come to an agreement, there would still likely be a funding lapse over the weekend. The House, which is slated to return Monday, would have to pass the five-bill spending package and the DHS stopgap."

In addition to demanding ICE reforms, a growing number of congressional Democrats are calling for Noem's ouster as DHS chief in the wake of Pretti's killing. Noem falsely claimed Pretti "arrived at the scene" in Minneapolis "to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement." Noem has attempted to blame Miller—who also smeared Pretti—for the lie.

More than three-quarters of the House Democratic caucus is now backing articles of impeachment against Noem, accusing her of obstruction of Congress, violation of the public trust, and self-dealing. Trump has thus far rejected calls to remove Noem, saying they "have a very good relationship."

"The two agents who shot and killed Alex Pretti are now on leave, but Trump still backs Noem instead of firing her," Rep. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.), the leader of the impeachment push, said late Wednesday. "I’m leading 174 members with articles of impeachment against Noem. The public is crying out for change. Enough is enough."


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I can't find the thread here on hexbear because search sucks but it's called "searchlight"

[–] MayoPete@hexbear.net 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The Searchlight Approach

To create a dynamic where residents have a stake in the policies that are most likely to increase growth and lower costs, we propose a novel, market-based federal incentive program that lowers housing costs by encouraging local governments to build more, and giving residents a financial incentive to support pro-housing policies.

Under our proposal, every household in communities that hit ambitious housing production targets would receive a cash rebate. If states and cities rapidly increase the pace and amount of housing development, their residents will benefit — not only through lower housing costs in the long run, but also through direct rebates to relieve housing cost burdens in the short run.

I scrolled a bit to try to figure out what shit they were shilling. I read that and I stopped. Call me highly skeptical but I think any plan to build much more housing should build much more fucking housing.

Where is this free money going to come from?

Ninja edit. I was an idiot. I scrolled a bit more and I gave myself an insta-migraine. It's fucking copypasta. I made smaller paragraphs - to help you if you want to give yourself a big headache.

Our proposal would apply incentives directly to each of the key players who may impact local decision-making on housing: current homeowners, current renters, and policymakers. Local debates over housing policy are typically dominated by a small segment of homeowners opposing more development, warning of changes to community character, stress on local infrastructure, and increased traffic.

Policymakers are largely responsive to these voices, who are typically more affluent and politically connected. The policy would give more residents a direct and short-term financial stake in boosting housing supply. While the prospect of a cash rebate may not bring all previously opposed residents to support new policies to build more, it may be attractive for some, especially lower-income homeowners.

Other homeowners’ opposition to new development may be softened by the understanding that their friends and neighbors would lose out on rebate checks.

I wonder if the entire page - hell, the entire site - is AI.

[–] MayoPete@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A lot of local politics would be solved if people got elected who are willing to tell the local NIMBY cranks to shut the fuck up

[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago

Ignore NIMBYs would be cruel and unusual punishment to all the high-priced dem consultants who want to buy a second yacht. It's their job to explain how nothing can ever get built in their policy papers that are 100s of pages long that nobody ever actually reads.