[-] gregs_gumption@lemm.ee 4 points 6 hours ago

I'm going to find a way to work this into my vocabularycheesy corn snack unit

[-] gregs_gumption@lemm.ee 13 points 3 days ago

In the the US laws are passed by the legislative branch, in particular laws around spending are passed by the House of Represtatives. Currently the House or Representatives is controlled by the Republican party, the party of which Donald Trump is the undisputed leader. As such Trump has sufficient control over the Republican party to broadly control the parties legislative priorities, including spending. In fact he has already used this authority to enact his legislative priorities around spending and immigration reform among other things.

Donald Trump has directed the Republican party to support the genocide in Gaza, so the Republican party provides the funding necessary to for the IDF to conduct the genocide in Gaza.

Additionally when Donald Trump was president he did several things to empower Israel including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and required all Palestinian affairs to go through this embassy.

While the Democratic party has played a part in supporting the genocide, Donald Trump and the Republican party absolutely have the power to stop the US from passing funding bills to arm the IDF and help stop the genocide. Instead he and the Republican party he leads enthusiastically support what Israel has been doing in Gaza and now are trying to do in Lebanon. There's every reason he'll take the US's support for the genocide even further.

[-] gregs_gumption@lemm.ee 10 points 4 days ago

That's a weird way of saying Trump supports Russian imperialism and will encourage genocide in Ukraine in addition to the genocide in Palestine.

[-] gregs_gumption@lemm.ee 10 points 4 days ago

Do you have any sources to back up your claims?

[-] gregs_gumption@lemm.ee 10 points 4 days ago

This sounds great but isn't really true at all. Please don't spread misinformation.

money Congress appropriates? Yes, federal agencies must prudently plan to spend money during its period of availability, but the President can request that Congress cancel or rescind some of this funding. The Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act (Impoundment Control Act) of 1974 outlines a fast-track procedure for legislation responding to a President's rescission request. Upon submitting a proposal to Congress, the President can withhold the funds targeted for rescission for up to 45 days or until a withholding would prevent the funding from being prudently obligated. If Congress has not enacted legislation by the end of that period, the funds must be released, and they cannot be proposed for rescission again under the Impoundment Control Act. Until 2018, a president had not proposed a rescission under this process since 2000. In May 2018, President Trump sent a package of proposed rescissions to Congress for consideration. Congress did not act on that request to approve any of the proposed reductions under the fast-track procedure, and the funding was released.

From here: http://democrats-budget.house.gov/publications/fact-sheets/frequently-asked-questions-about-federal-budget#Congress%20appropriates

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impoundment_of_appropriated_funds

[-] gregs_gumption@lemm.ee 96 points 6 days ago

This reticence to give out CHIPS Act funding right away apparently stemmed from fears from the government that Intel specifically would not meet its promises. “[There is fear that] Intel is going to take chips money, build an empty shell of a factory and then never actually open it, because they don’t have customers,” said former Commerce Department official Caitlin Legacki.

Honestly this seems like rare reasonable move by the federal government.

gregs_gumption

joined 1 week ago