this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
141 points (98.0% liked)

politics

22012 readers
4037 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 1 points 43 minutes ago

Desperate to undue the conditions that allowed a black man to become president of the United States.

Nothing more, nothing less. A black president was such an insulting aberation against the natural order to them they decided it is time to burn society to the ground.

[–] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 12 points 8 hours ago (3 children)

Just to be sure, no president can kill a department just by decree. It takes an act of Congress

[–] IHeartBadCode@fedia.io 11 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The most recent continuing resolution authorized the President to begin sequestration and placed the national budget on emergency deficit reduction. That was in section 1113 of the law.

Under sequestration, the President is given emergency powers to "fix" the budget and the funding automatically matches what the President says. No need for any additional votes.

So Congress already gave him the green light to do whatever he wants and Congress has already pre-approved it. Now the Department will still be there in name. Senate confirmed officials will most move into advisement roles, but yeah after that last CR, Congress gave Trump the thumbs up to go hog wild.

Now sequestration is a process so I'm sure there will be flights over the process, like on what date an agency is sequestered, the published scope, etc. But Trump has the ability to sequester the full amount for the Department of Education and Congress says the budget automatically will adjust to meet whatever he determines.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 3 points 2 hours ago

This is what Chuck Schumer directed the democrats vote for

[–] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

Well to be fair trump is no president.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 5 points 7 hours ago

Well Linda can’t be doing a very good job

[–] deadkennedy@lemm.ee 46 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

i, for one, am thrilled that “because jesus” will become the catch-all answer to every question in some states.

we are going to be the dumbest nation so quickly.

[–] arrow74@lemm.ee 1 points 2 hours ago

I wonder when I can claim asylum elsewhere

[–] venotic@kbin.melroy.org 4 points 4 hours ago

"What's 2 + 4?"

"JESUS!"

"Where is Copper on the elemental table?"

"GOD!"

"If Jimmy bought 3 apples for 5 cents a piece, how many apples would he need to buy to reach $2?"

"UHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH....JESUS AND GOD!"

[–] adarza@lemmy.ca 30 points 12 hours ago (1 children)
[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 12 points 12 hours ago

qualify it with "industrialized" and you win.

[–] jmantothe64@lemmy.world 26 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Directly from ed.gov:

In creating the Department of Education, Congress specified that: No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system...

Don't let anyone tell you they're just getting rid of "woke dei curriculum", they're trying to screw over all the people who need the help of things like an IEP or 504 Plan by cutting staff for those programs, end subsidized loans, grants, etc for those who can't afford college, you get the point. Be very glad that if you were able to get an education before this point that you did, and expect the interest rate on your student loans to go up...

[–] oxysis@lemm.ee 9 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I still have 2 years left to finish my degree and now I won’t even be able to pay for it. Not that I won’t be forced to move for my own safety

[–] jmantothe64@lemmy.world 6 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

I'm in the same boat, I'm just really hoping this administration collapses (either by itself or by enough external influence) soon. I suppose one silver lining might be that there is no provisions in our constitution that can stop or postpone an election, even in war

[–] oxysis@lemm.ee 9 points 11 hours ago

The collapse of this country is the only thing I have left to look forward to, everything else is just spiraling down and down

[–] whodrankarnoldpalmer@startrek.website 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

So the options are:

  1. the situation gets better on its own
  2. someone from elsewhere comes to save America from itself

Seems there’s a third option that also happens to be the only legitimate one.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Looking backwards, option 1 is definitely the least likely because before the election they told us, in great detail, what would happen if he won without any kind of worry they let the cat out of the bag. They were 10 steps ahead of everyone and probably still are.

[–] PaulBunyan@lemm.ee 13 points 11 hours ago

This threat has been lingering since he retook office. I asked my partner, who is at an education conference as an elementary teacher, what percentage of teachers support the end of the Dept of Education. She doesn’t know one teacher that supports the removal. Not one.

Can we go back to wanting more pay/benefits for teachers and not hosing them more than ever?

[–] jordanlund@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

As outrageous as this is, it made me curious... for me, the Department of Education is just one of those things I've kind of always known about, but did you know that the current office and secretary was created in 1979? Under Jimmy Carter?

🤯

It's amazing how... recent... a lot of these cabinet positions actually are:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_the_United_States

Homeland Security - 2003 (that tracks)
Veterans Affairs - 1989
Education - 1979
(Previously "Health, Education, and Welfare") - 1953
Energy - 1977
Transportation - 1967
Housing and Urban Development - 1966
Health and Human Services - 1980
(Previously "Health, Education, and Welfare") - 1953
Labor - 1913
(Previously "Commerce and Labor") - 1903
Commerce - 1913
(Previously "Commerce and Labor") - 1903
Agriculture - 1862
Interior - 1849
Attorney General - 1789
Defense - 1947
(Previously "Secretary of War") - 1789
(Previously "Secretary of the Navy") - 1798
(Previously "Secretary AT War") - 1783
Treasury - 1789
(Previously "Superintendent of Finance") - 1771
State - 1789
(Previously "Secretary of foreign affairs") - 1781
Vice President - 1789

[–] venotic@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 4 hours ago

America, land of development. /s

It doesn't surprise me considering how long it took for them to allow women to vote, how long it took them to establish civil rights for blacks, how long it took them to legalize same sex marriage (that's going to be undone at somepoint in the future).