Their idea was to tie approval of military assistance to Ukraine to tough border security demands that Democrats would never accept, allowing Republicans to block the money for Kyiv that many of them oppose while simultaneously enabling them to pound Democrats for refusing to halt a surge of migrants at the border. It was to be a win-win headed into November’s elections.

But Democrats tripped them up by offering substantial — almost unheard-of — concessions on immigration policy without insisting on much in return. Now it is Republicans who are rapidly abandoning a compromise that gave them much of what they wanted, leaving aid to Ukraine in deep jeopardy, border policy in turmoil and Congress again flailing as multiple crises at home and abroad go without attention because of a legislative stalemate.

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    We need single issue bills. It should be illegal to pack your legislature fatter than Augustus Gloop.

    • Sanctus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Also, fuck these assholes. Its painfully obvious they just want to fuck over Democrats AT OUR EXPENSE. WE PAY THEIR SALARIES THROUGH TAXES NOW FUCKEN WORK.

      • Hegar@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s not just about fucking over democrats at any cost, it’s also about showing their allies in the kremlin how useful they are.

        The clear majority of americans don’t want republican party policies. Republicans have openly discussed that reality since bush lost the election in 2000 and got to be president anyway. Senior strategists like pat buchanan have been quite honest that they feel like this is their last chance to foist their ultra conservative vision on an unwilling country before they’re confined to the dustbin of history.

    • Habahnow@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      9 months ago

      That’s how things get done in Congress honestly. If Republicans say, “we promise if you provide border funding, we’ll support legislation to provide Israel and Ukraine funding” you have to trust that after you pass the law, they won’t back off of their deal.

      I’d be curious how other countries handle this situation

      • Hyperreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        In non-first past the post systems you often end up with coalition governments.

        The result is that you can screw the other guy over, but you’re likely to be in government with them sooner rather than later, at which point they’ll screw you right back.

        It breeds compromise, even if it happens after spending a full year negotiating before agreeing to enter a coalition government and exactly and to ten decimal places which laws you that government will be enacting during the coming parliament.

      • silence7@slrpnk.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        Except that this stuff was packaged together, so they couldn’t pick one and refuse the other. So they refused the whole package.

        • Evilcoleslaw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          So? If they weren’t both packaged together they were both going to be voted down. Republicans don’t want the Ukraine funding and Republicans have decided for now that it’s better politically to have a mess at the border to blame on Biden. They don’t want either proposal to pass so splitting them does nothing.

    • RealFknNito@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Nothing would ever get passed then. Every party would vote for what their side aligns with. Concessions means taking a small loss instead of a complete one. For both sides.