474
Pedo party vote NO (thelemmy.club)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
39 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 159 points 2 months ago (9 children)

Social media platforms would be required to implement age verification measures to ensure youth under 16 can’t create social media accounts and allow parents to oversee social media use by 16- and 17-year-olds.

Yes.

It's tiresome how lawmakers love to put a ton of shit into a single vote.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 55 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    It may be that is the actual reason these republicans voted no. Not that I trust them with kids close by, but 1 vote for a bill that looks more like a Walmart on crack than, well, a proper bill, I can imagine you end up voting in interesting ways sometimes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    It really is a pervasive issue, similar to how Republicans keep ramming pet projects into budget reconciliation bills in the House. We really need legislation that bars bills from containing unrelated items in them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    I’m not from the states so please forgive me if this is incorrect, but I’ve read a “bill” can start out as one thing. Get a load of traction, then be changed last minute to something else entirely just before the vote. Is that true? Seems impossible track if it is

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Yup. Check the title of this bill vs the amendment

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/s1318/text

    "Fallen Servicemembers Religious Heritage Restoration Act"

    Amendment: "... Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

    1.Short titles; table of contents (a)Short titles This Act may be cited as the Foreign Intelligence Accountability Act and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    So that sounds good in theory, but in practice it is used to prevent anything the judiciary dislikes from being done. Have a single issue bill that all it says is it moves cannabis from class 1 to class 3 controlled substance? Well that affects interstate commerce too so whoopsie can't write that law.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    This is a strategy, and has been for years, ever since political advertising became a thing over the air. "Congressman X voted NO on a bill that would stop people from drinking raw sewage (because it also contained a section that would limit the ability of the federal government to regulate food)", etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent