- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Can’t congress pass a law making abortion legal nationwide?
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:02 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The subject matter of the law isn't the issue of this discussion.
In terms of legislative process- no.
quote:
Abortion isn't special.
0
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:02 am to udtiger
quote:
I'd love to see a state sack up and say "frick you" and eliminate Medicaid.
I think Medicaid money is over half the budget of every state.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:03 am to TrueTiger
quote:
that is the other trick bag that we the people have allowed those bastards to hang over our heads.
OH no, they can also go the regulatory route.
Healthcare is highly regulated and fedgov can possibly use that to put the screws to states who outlaw abortion.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:03 am to TrueTiger
quote:
quote:
Or via funding, which is the more likely route.
agree, that is the other trick bag that we the people have allowed those bastards to hang over our heads
fricking 17th Amendment.
This sort of shite would never happen if Senators had to directly answer to state legislatures.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:04 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I think Medicaid money is over half the budget of every state
Oh, no doubt states are junkies for that sweet Medicaid $$$
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:05 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Healthcare is highly regulated and fedgov can possibly use that to put the screws to states who outlaw abortion.
like I said, we the people got fat, dumb, and happy and fell asleep on watch
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Healthcare is highly regulated and fedgov can possibly use that to put the screws to states who outlaw abortion
So is immigration, but the courts said Trump couldn't frick with funding for sanctuary cities. There would have to be some sort of legislative basis to support the regs.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:06 am to NC_Tigah
quote:the first two Sessions immediately following Roe. Where is the third?
Dems have had Congressional SUPERMAJORITIES on 3 occasions since Roe.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:07 am to udtiger
quote:
fricking 17th Amendment.
16th, 17th, 18th, 19th
the seeds of our destruction were planted at this point in U.S. history
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:08 am to TrueTiger
quote:
16th, 17th, 18th, 19th
the seeds of our destruction were planted at this point in U.S. history
It's not called "The Progressive Era" for nothing
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:09 am to AggieHank86
quote:
the first two Sessions immediately following Roe. Where is the third?
The brief period when Obamacare was passed.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:11 am to Wednesday
quote:Not even remotely. SCOTUS said that abortion is not a Constitutional right.
Where in the case did the court state that there is no federal power to regulate abortion?quote:
It’s the entire basis for the holding.
It did not rule upon Congressional authority to legislate the issue.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:12 am to udtiger
quote:
fricking 17th Amendment.
This sort of shite would never happen if Senators had to directly answer to state legislatures.
Why not? They see it as free money.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:14 am to udtiger
quote:
but the courts said Trump couldn't frick with funding for sanctuary cities.
I believe appellate courts agreed with Trump.
Biden just reversed the policy once he took office
quote:
In an internal memo seen by Reuters, acting head of the Office of Justice Programs Maureen Henneberg said that prior grant recipients, including cities, counties and states that were recipients of the department's popular $250 million annual grant program for local law enforcement, will no longer be required to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as a condition of their funding.
quote:
Shortly after being sworn in, Biden overturned a Trump executive order that had allowed the Justice Department to pressure cities that refused to notify federal immigration authorities when people living in the U.S. illegally have been detained for criminal violations, including minor ones.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:15 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Where is the third?
Between Spring 09 and January 2010 I believe. Between Arlen Specter’s party switch and Scott Brown’s special election win.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
fricking 17th Amendment.
This sort of shite would never happen if Senators had to directly answer to state legislatures.
Why not? They see it as free money
It would have never gotten to that point. The erosion of states rights since then is what created the ability to leverage federal $
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:17 am to udtiger
quote:
It would have never gotten to that point.
But why? Especially from poorer states?
Medicaid funding is +EV for them. This is literal free money siphoned from richer states/populations.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:19 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
But why? Especially from poorer states?
Medicaid funding is +EV for them. This is literal free money siphoned from richer states/populations
17th was ratified in the 19teens. My point was that the federal leviathan we know today would have never come to be.
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:25 am to udtiger
quote:
My point was that the federal leviathan we know today would have never come to be.
There is no reason to think that incrementalism, at the least, would not have occurred. Especially after the economic boom post-WW2. There was just too much money flowing around (hence why the real expansion occurred in the 60s).
Posted on 6/25/22 at 8:30 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
My point was that the federal leviathan we know today would have never come to be.
There is no reason to think that incrementalism, at the least, would not have occurred. Especially after the economic boom post-WW2. There was just too much money flowing around (hence why the real expansion occurred in the 60s
Agree to disagree.
Page 5 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News