#Rep Council

[sw5w]

Our Two Great Societies Have Always Lived in Peace

STAR WARS EPISODE I: The Phantom Menace 01:41:05

[notherpuppet]

I laughed so much while drawing this 💖 anime overlord high AU

[haunted-xander]

kh2 except Sora & Riku stay on the islands and go to a school post-game and also this happens bc I think it's funny

[phoenixyfriend]

The Shift in America's Support of Israel as of 3/25/24

Okay, so there have been three specific incidents recently that I'd like to cover for you guys.

Chuck Schumer's speech calling for a new election in Israel, which I have spoken about here and here. (3/14/24)

Congress voting to ban UNRWA funding until 2025, which I've seen a lot of people talking about, but often without an actual understanding of what the situation actually is. (It's bad, but it's not the same type of bad as people think.) (3/24/24)

The US abstaining from a UN Security Council vote, which is effectively voting against Israel when they have thus far been the only ones to use veto power in this manner. (3/25/24)

I'm not going to go into detail about Schumer, since I've already covered it. tldr: it's a very specifically worded speech that does not explicitly threaten Israel, but if you do even the slightest bit of reading between the lines, that is absolutely what is happening.

Also, before I move forward: the US may not be donating to UNRWA for the rest of the fiscal year, but you can. They have direct donation links.

UNRWA funding has been on hold for a while, but this is... complicated. Not morally, because UNRWA does need funding and to defund it is truly unconscionable, but many of the "Biden signed it into law" posts are approaching it with this implied message that UNRWA would have funding if not for Biden signing it.

Except that isn't really how the US government works. Especially this government.

Funding for 2024 was supposed to be passed months ago. We are on the verge of another government shutdown. UNRWA funding is not on the table until the House swings blue. I hate to be the one to say this, but it's... like, it's not something I can change alone. I know you're tired of hearing it, but voting in November is the key to fixing a whole lot of problems.

One of the core duties of Congress is passing budgets. For those budgets to pass, they need to be approved by the House (Republican Majority), the Senate (Democrat Majority), and the President. The reason it has taken five months to pass a yearly budget (the deadline iirc was September or October) is because anything approved by one chamber is shot down by the other.

UNRWA's de-funding is tied to Ukraine funding (and a few other things). Biden refusing to sign would not have brought back UNRWA funding. The funding is already on hold. We do not have the votes to bring it back. We just straight up do not have enough seats in the House to make that happen. Biden refusing to sign would have resulted in both UNRWA and Ukraine not having funding, indefinitely. Signing it resulted in one of the two getting funding.

This is not a situation where funding was approved and now cut. This is not a situation where money was already flowing to UNRWA. This is a situation where money wasn't going anywhere, because Congress is a split shitshow.

Think of it like this: Funding is water coming from a spigot. Congress can turn it on or off, and it's currently off. Biden can smack away the hand coming to twist the valve, but he can't touch the valve himself. That's what the presidential veto is. Unfortunately, the spigot is already off, and Biden can't twist it back on when Congress isn't already reaching to do so.

Is this bad? Yes! UNRWA's funding should never have been cut! We should still be very, very upset about this! But I need you to understand that the way the US government works is not a dictatorship. Biden cannot just overrule Congress, especially when we're on the verge of another shutdown.

I do not think it is fair or even really acceptable that UNRWA's funding was viewed as an appropriate point of compromise. I'm just, unfortunately, also aware that this particular legislation is a tug-of-war that was never going to end with funding going to Palestine, not with the current Republican control of the House.

"But Biden sent money to Israel a bunch of times--" Yeah, and he's paying for it in the polls. He's aware that people are pissed at him. That choice is already biting him in the ass.

Biden is not perfect and I am never going to claim he is, but please recognize that the UNRWA funding pull is not a current action. It is a past action that is now being sustained because the House is red. You want to bring back UNRWA funding? Get rid of Marjorie Taylor Green and her entire cohort.

The other reason I'm less than eager to view that UNRWA thing as Biden being pro-Israel is because the US has finally abstained on a UN vote instead of vetoing.

When the US has been the only voice on Israel's side in the Security Council this whole time, abstention is functionally voting against them. We already knew that 13-14 of the other 14 members were going to vote pro-ceasefire. They have been this entire time. The US abstaining is functionally agreeing.

Why did the US not just vote for the ceasefire, then? No idea. Might be a treaty thing. I don't really need to know, because the result is that the UN Security Council has finally passed a measure against Israel, and those things are legally binding, and we know it's a big step because Israel's government is not happy.

When paired with the Schumer speech from a week and a half ago, it indicates a major shift in US foreign policy.

From the Al Jazeera article:

The US had repeatedly blocked Security Council resolutions that put pressure on Israel but has increasingly shown frustration with its ally as civilian casualties mount and the UN warns of impending famine in Gaza. Speaking after the vote, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield blamed Hamas for the delay in passing a ceasefire resolution. “We did not agree with everything with the resolution,” which she said was the reason why the US abstained. “Certain key edits were ignored, including our request to add a condemnation of Hamas,” Thomas-Greenfield said. [...] The White House said the final resolution did not have language the US considers essential and its abstention does not represent a shift in policy. But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said the US failure to veto the resolution is a “clear retreat” from its previous position and would hurt war efforts against Hamas as well as efforts to release Israeli captives held in Gaza.

This action has also resulted in Israel pulling plans for "a high-level delegation" to visit the US for discussions on the invasion of Rafah (which Biden has purportedly been warning against for a while).

“We’re very disappointed that they won’t be coming to Washington, DC, to allow us to have a fulsome conversation with them about viable alternatives to them going in on the ground in Rafah,” [John] Kirby told reporters. [...] Last week, Netanyahu promised to defy US appeals and expand Israel’s military campaign to Rafah even without its ally’s support.

There are other complications and details here, such as that the resolution does not call for a permanent ceasefire, and that US tensions with Russia and China are still somehow playing a role in the negotiations over the ceasefire text, but ultimately...

The US abstaining is a good thing. Schumer's speech is a good thing. They are not enough, but they are good things. They are steps forward.

The pull of funding from UNRWA is not a good thing. It is, in fact, a very, very bad thing. It just also looks a lot like it was unavoidable.

So call your reps, and vote come November. It's a long slog and we all know it, but we can't make change without dedication.

To support my blogging so I can move out of my parents’ house, I do have a ko-fi. Alternately, you can donate to one of the charities I list in this post.

[derpu-doodles]

may I offer you a Makoto Yuki in these trying times

[thebxghag]

learning CSP so I drew some sokkla. as a treat.

[officialpenisenvy]

was looking through my old whatsapp stickers and found a photo of my high school greek teacher and our student council rep crossdressing together

[mobblespsycho100]

dunmeshi indonesian high school au . kabru waketos and rin ketos

[bruhstation]

YOU GOT A HIDDEN TALENT BRO 🔥🔥 KEEP THAT SHIT HIDDEN‼️‼️

[kottkrig]

The Desolate Council, save for Lilian who has some more meat, consists of characters with like 2-3 tropes and typical cookie cutter WoW style dialogue which means I am taking it upon myself to personally give them more personality and depth

Iirc only Calia makes an appearance in any books, and maybe Lilian? I haven't read any of them

[sw5w]

Yousa Bringen Da Mackineeks

STAR WARS EPISODE I: The Phantom Menace 01:40:31

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Gov. Tony Evers vetoed a bill Monday that would have eliminated work permits for the state's youngest employees, which he said would prevent children from being "taken advantage of."

Evers vetoed the bill at the Wisconsin State Council of Machinists Conference on Monday at a Capitol Square hotel alongside members of the Wisconsin AFL-CIO.

"Growing up, it shouldn't be worrying about getting injured on the job, or receiving a fair wage for their work, or being taken advantage of," Evers said shortly before the signing. "It's time that Republicans get real about the real pressing challenges, and I've put them on notice."

The bill would effectively eliminate work permits for 14- and 15-year olds in Wisconsin, as state law changed in 2017 to remove the requirement for 16- and 17-year-olds. That law also replaced references of "child labor" in state statutes to the "employment of minors."

"Parents should have the right to deal with this issue," Evers said as he vetoed the legislation. "(The bill) sends a message that 14- and 15-year-olds can do anything, they can go into the most dangerous places without any OK. And that is just absolutely wrong."

Sen. Cory Tomczyk, R-Mosinee, Rep. Clint Moses, R-Menomonie and Rep. Amy Binsfeld, R-Sheboygan, who introduced the bill last year, said that it would remove needless administrative barriers that slow down the hiring process.

Currently, work permits are required for 14- and 15-year-olds, unless they work in the agriculture or domestic service sectors. Parents or guardians must apply for their child's work permit, and the $10 fee is reimbursed by employers.

The bill would have also eliminated street trade permits for the age group, which are needed to deliver newspapers or sell products door-to-door, for example. Those permits don't apply when fundraising for nonprofits or schools.

DWD issues about 35,000 work permits for minors each year.

Opponents of the bill argued that removing the permit system would take away the method of informing employers about child labor laws and the Department of Workforce Development's system for collecting data to guide efforts to reduce violations, which would be suspended without funding to cover the agency's $169,000 increase in costs.

"The bill is anticipated to reduce education and outreach interactions with employers, employees and their guardians, which would increase the number of (Equal Rights Division) investigations," the department wrote in testimony during a hearing on the bill late last year.

Child labor violations tracked by the federal government have spiked nationally, including investigations tied to Wisconsin.

A federal investigation into a 16-year-old boy's death at a Florence sawmill this summer found the company employed children as young as 14 to illegally operate machinery and work outside of permitted hours. Three children, ages 15 to 16, were injured at the mill in the last two years. The company paid about $191,000 in fines.

And a Wisconsin-based food safety sanitation company paid $1.5 million in fines earlier this year for illegally employing more than 100 children in eight states, following a U.S. Department of Labor investigation.

Evers has vetoed similar bills before.

Labor groups like the Wisconsin AFL-CIO opposed that effort, arguing permits protect young workers from exploitation and give parents a say in their child's employment.

[corvidcall]

there's a podcast i like thats focused on leftist theory through a christian lens (which i just think is really interesting, given how many christians you meet that are loudly anti-communist and for some reason are convinced jesus would love capitalism) and i just saw a tweet thread they made saying that, for Lent, they want to give up the US blockade against Cuba (so theyre spending the next 40 days writing letters to biden and their local reps and encouraging others to do the same)

i am delighted i bought all those stamps at costco because i am gonna be writing some goddamn letters to our dumbfuck government

[arkhavens]

Ki-adi-mundi? in My star wars show?

its more likely than you'd think

[celestialulu]

made a decision when feeling extra extroverted why did I do that

[deafknell]

Think the funniest poll idea would be "who is the gayest rezero character" and you'd have options like Subaru admiring Julius' hips, or Felix saying he loves Fourier, or Priscilla for kissing Liliana to stop Sirius' authority. Ublik as well I think is canonically Bi, though I don't remember how much that gets brought up in canon, if at all. Mostly unsurprising picks.

But then you have the real wildcards like Bordeaux, the racist eyebrows guy from arc 3, somehow top most of them in terms of his "friendship" with Pivot.