HRC Article:
WASHINGTON — Last night, President Biden signed the FY25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law, which includes a provision inserted by Speaker Mike Johnson blocking healthcare for the transgender children of military servicemembers. This provision, the first anti-LGBTQ+ federal law enacted since the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, will rip medically necessary care from the transgender children of thousands of military families – families who make incredible sacrifices in defense of the country each and every day. The last anti-LGBTQ+ federal law that explicitly targeted military servicemembers was Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, which went into effect in 1994.
Biden’s press release:
No service member should have to decide between their family’s health care access and their call to serve our Nation.
This is the bill in question: H.R 5009
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5009
I implore anyone defending Biden for this as him having to make a “tough decision” to review the roll calls for the votes on this bill.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1182/vote_118_2_00325.htm
40 Democratic senators voted yes.
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024500
81 Democratic represenatives voted yes.
This anti-trans bill was passed with support from the Democrats. The bourgeoisie political parties of the United States will never protect your human rights, especially when dollars for the military are on the line.
Further cementing both parties as part and parcel to the problems in America.
One wrecks shop, the other apologizes and “hopes” they don’t wreck it more, really really with sugar on top, BLM, 💜💜
I’m not sure what I’m insulted by more, the fascists or the pandering corporate Democrat liars pretending we’re all best friends.
Neither speak for our country. We, the workers, the toilers, the sticks that churn this economy should be the ones speaking for it, not these thieves and grifters.
A big part of the issue is they need 60 votes on budgets, constitutional amendments, court decision reversals, and removal from court/congress/presidency.
So either you have bipartisanship between moderates and literally satan to cover 99.9% of troops families, or you have the entire government collapse leaving every single troops family without coverage.
The only way out is to give the progressive party 60 votes, but every election cycle we stray further away from that.
Although there is also a way for 34 states to come together and force a constitutional change, but idk if that has ever once happened in all of US History?
Disagree. The only reason 60 votes are needed is because somebody will filibuster it. So grow a fucking backbone, and call out whichever asshole senator is refusing to fund the troops because he cares more about sticking it to transgender people. Don’t just vote for the thing, don’t focus on getting it passef no matter what, put your fucking foot down and name and shame. Point out that one person is holding up a spending bill worth hundreds of billions of dollars over an objection to a line item that probably costs $100k.
Or better, reform the filibuster. The filibuster is a good thing in concept. The procedural filibuster however means that it now takes 60 votes to pass something instead of 50 and there’s essentially no consequence for that. That was not the intent of the Framers.
If you want to filibuster something, you should have to get up there and read the phone book for hours. It should grind the government to a halt. It should be disruptive to everything, a measure used for only the worst bills.
What about flipping the script and accusing the Republicans on every avenue that they want the troops to go without coverage, unless they get their bigotry in it too?
Why not accuse them of wanting to deny coverage to all these troops?
The reality is that the Dems are fine with this and never cared about Trans rights past identifying it as relevant to get votes with progressives. Now as it has served its usefullness to them, they discard Trans people, like they will discard other LGBT, ethnic and religious minorities…
Because the election was a month ago and a new congress is about to take over immediately after a recess, at which point Trump will be entering office. Either a bipartisan bill passes now or a conservative one passes after January.
Either a bipartisan bill passes now or a conservative one passes after January.
This is a conservative bill.
I’m sorry to hear about your reading impairment. Get well soon.
Both conservative parties voted for the anti-trans bill you keep defending. It can be both bipartisan and conservative. That’s what bipartisan has implied for at least a decade.
Its a really bad look to desperately try to remove as much context as possible.
So what is the difference between a bipartisan anti-trans bill and a republican anti-trans bill, if both bills are designed by the Republicans?
Several Republican Amendments were removed from the final version of the bill, including blocking Palestinian Refugees, defunding the Pier in Palestine used to ship necessary aid in, stopping any military academy from engaging in Critical Race Theory, blocking reproductive care reimbursement for military, among many other things.
If you want to read up on it, heres a good SUMMARY
we should swap the pardon power for line item veto
we should swap the pardon power for line item veto
Yeah. Would be neat watching Democrats make excuses for why only Republicans could use it.
You know, I get that there are problems with the Democrats, I really do. But when a Republican alters a bill to include a massively shitty clause, and the president signs it in place because the alternative is likely people not getting paid, and someone suggests a fix to this shitty behavior in a broken system, you always lean into the response of, “Yep, too bad the Democrats don’t want to do shitty stuff, too.” While consistently ignoring all the rest of it.
It makes me think you might not be discussing this in good faith.
But when a Republican alters a bill to include a massively shitty clause, and the president signs it in place because the alternative is likely people not getting paid
Where do you draw the line?
If a Republican alters a bill to include “outlaw miscegenation among military servicemembers” and the president signs it because the alternative is likely people not getting paid, are you okay with that?
“outlaw miscegenation among military servicemembers”
You sir have sent me to a dictionary. You are hereby awarded one pat to be applied to the back
Nope, but if he hadn’t signed it the headline would have been “Biden Canceled Christmas for America’s Troops”, which is a large part of the reason the Republicans did this, and the same people who are complaining about him signing would be complaining about him not signing.
And honestly, I think this will be forgotten pretty quickly when Trump and the Republicans start rolling out all kinds of regressive laws, some of which I’m sure will supercede this. And some people here will blame the Democrats for not having run a compelling enough campaign, since personal survival isn’t compelling enough for some people.
I’m glad the president that already lost the election cares more about headlines than his constituents rights.
Oh no, not a bad headline! Think of what that would do to Biden’s reelection chances! 🙄
Do not obey in advance. Democrats, by giving ground here, are laying the groundwork for much worse things that Republicans are going to be able to do in the future. I’m trans and I’m pretty sure I’m going to fucking die, because Democrats would rather sacrifice me to avoid bad headlines.
Ah, the commenter who was dedicated to the loss of the Dems at all costs is now giving advice to the Democratic Party, how wonderful. And blaming the GOP administration that may very well kill her and countless other oppressed demographics, myself included, she helped usher in on the Dems too, how predictable.
By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the Democratic Party is at the same time too strong and too weak, right?
The democratic party is a bourgeoisie party that serves the interests of the ruling class, just like the Republicans. It is irrelevant what you say or do, the outcome of elections is determined by the bourgeoisie of the United States. Democrats have made numerous promises to protect trans people and yet, 121 democrats voted for this bill.
Ah, the commenter who was dedicated to the loss of the Dems at all costs
You spent the past year saying that about anyone who was in the least upset about genocide.
Democrats chose who they wanted to be shitty to.
This is going to be Democrats’ last word about trans people for a long time.
You’ll have to get 60 votes to make it happen. I’m game, honestly, nobody should be above the law, and precisely for that reason no Republican would ever vote for this.
God when will people stop falling for this crap, this is exactly the culture war repubs are waging. Half of them don’t even give a crap about shitting on LGBTQ+, what they care about is shitting on the Dems so R’s can stay in power. They put the poison pill in a bill that Biden has no choice but to sign, JUST TO GET HEADLINES LIKE THIS, so that progressives will blame Biden and the democrats instead of the magats. And you fall for it every time. Sure, sometimes you also blame the R’s for actually doing the bad things, but you always blame democrats when they aren’t able to stop R’s from doing the bad things. You all might hate the military but we kind of need one and if we just shut it down we’re leaving ourselves vulnerable. What you are doing by blaming Biden for this is like saying yeah what the rapist did was wrong but she didn’t fight him off hard enough, she must have wanted it. smh
Why didnt the Democrats block this bill and accuse the Republicans of trying to abuse it to pass their bigotry, rather putting millions of people well being on the line?
If you always play the bad game instead of standing up from the table and calling it out, it is because you do like playing the game and you are fine with the consequences.
They put the poison pill in a bill that Biden has no choice but to sign
He could have refused to sign. But that might have violated one of the precious norms that Democrats care more about than trans people.
Tell us you have no idea how the government works without telling us you have no idea how the government works.
Centrists pull out the “you don’t know how government works” gaslighting whenever someone calls them out and they have no actual rebuttal.
Concession accepted.
It’s called facing reality and dealing with it, which isn’t nearly as much fun as mindlessly bashing oversimplified interpretations of click-bait headlines. Sure, it’s nice to play the game online where you pick one issue and ignore all the other issues no matter how important they are, but in the real world you have to do the best you can do. The consequences of vetoing the bill would be huge, while one of the articles posted elsewhere in the comments here[1] talks about the number of children who could be affected and that there are very few circumstances where the provision in the bill would have an impact (e.g. it only disallows treatments that would result in sterilization, which doesn’t include puberty blockers, etc.). But you’re obviously not interested in seriously considering the details and practicalities of the real world situation, just enjoying railing against Biden, so have fun with that.
[1] edit to repost that link: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/senate-passes-military-bill-with-provision-restricting-trans-healthcare/
Being willing to sacrifice the rights and protections of ‘a few’ minorities so that our already inflated military doesn’t face delays in payment is exactly what Biden and the other democrats are being criticized for here.
That you agree that those rights are unimportant isn’t exactly the impassioned defense you think it is
Being willing to sacrifice the rights and protections of ‘a few’ minorities
Democrats aren’t just willing to sacrifice trans people. They’re eager to.
“But protecting minorities just isn’t popular. We’ll never win if we’re too woke.”
The copium is strong in this one.
I already accepted your concession. You got what you wanted out of this bill. It’s a shame they had to fund the military too, huh?
Huh, so interesting, I thought only conservatives argued like this. Acting like a child and just basically saying ‘I won.’
Ending with a logical fallacy too, chefs kiss of being a troll/dumbass. Hats off to you, sir.
Well as long as the soldiers get their Christmas bonuses, I suppose a few thousand dead children is an acceptable price to pay. We wouldn’t want the soldiers to have their Christmas ruined, and it’s not like it would be the Republicans’ fault for politicizing a must-pass spending bill. Oh well, it’s not like trans kids are really human, a 9/11 worth of child corpses is fine. We wouldn’t want to ruin Christmas.
It doesn’t cover their hormone replacement and other trans care, but it still covers all their sickness and injuries.
Well as long as the soldiers get their Christmas bonuses, I suppose a few thousand dead children is an acceptable price to pay.
As though Democrats wouldn’t have voted for the anti-trans provision as a standalone bill.
I guess if there was any doubt before, it’s gone now. Neither party is suitable. Time to really vote progressive. We need a new party that isn’t deeply entrenched with whatever made hime sign that.
Out of curiosity if I made you choose between:
-
0% of military troops’ families getting salaries and healthcare
-
100% of military troops’ families getting salaries and healthcare with the sole exception of trans care
What would you choose?
Although, honestly, since we’re in hypotheticals and foresight, Biden could have let them go without pay and possibly triggered a Bonus Army type scenario where the military protests.
-
Time to do more than voting, comrade. The rule makers will never allow real change within the rules that they create.
Agreed, and what we really need is to actually end the duopoly by changing the voting system to a more fairly representative one like ranked-choice or rated, in the first place. Voting third party will just increase the chance of Republicans winning if that third party is left-leaning, and no third party will get a majority vote if you can’t convince the vast majority of Americans to completely change their entire understanding of political parties that they’ve held on to for the past decades.
Just my opinion here, but the primary thing we should focus on is changing voting systems, because that’s what will actually allow us to have a third party be successful in the first place.
Voting systems are extremely hard to change in most states. But progressive candidates usually support voting changes too. So two birds with one stone. It will be a painful few cycles with the Republicans winning. But they have shown they will turn on each other rather fast. And once we show we just aren’t going to vote democrat or republican, momentum will build. Things can’t get much worse.
How exactly do we focus on changing voting systems? Obviously vote for Democrats who support giving power to the people. What if they don’t?
“Biden cares about trans people unlike Trump!”
Old bigot white dude is an old bigot, news at 11. At least Trump makes it clear he wants my kind to die in a fire for good ratings on Fox News.
I’m lost. He spoke against it, but signed it anyway. Did they give any rationalization for signing it?
Most of the replies here aren’t giving you a solid answer, though @[email protected] was close—so sorry about that.
At one point, the bill text included anti-refugee, anti-CRT, and other controversial provisions that Republicans added, but those were fortunately removed.
However, the anti-trans language was reportedly “slipped in” during the final stages and didn’t even appear in the bill summary. The bill itself has been described as “must pass,” which means it’s prioritized regardless of what’s in it.
Final takeaway: Bad actors in Congress added the language, and Biden didn’t care enough about trans rights to thoroughly review it.
Sources:
If he didn’t sign it then families would have just gone without coverage and the military would be unfunded until Trump entered office and signed it regardless. In fact, handing it off to the next congress could result in an even worse bill.
Paraphrasing here, but “we need to spend money on the military otherwise we won’t be safe”
Except that doesn’t really hold up since they could have sent it back to be modified and voted on again anyways.
“if we need to do it, you can fuck off with this shit and do it right” should have been the official explanation of a veto.
No, not enough time to send it back and the R’s knew exactly what they were doing here.
Democrats are willing to go into a government shutdown rather than cave. Biden should have fought harder.
Actually, Biden signed the congressional budget 5 days ago averting Shutdown. Democrats don’t want shutdown, Republicans do.
If only there was some way for him to stop it from happening… Well, Joe, at least you tried.
It’s not like his own opponent did something like that in the past because he didn’t like the text of the bill. Surely not…
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/vetoes/TrumpDJ.htm
Stupidity and cowardice. He’s a lame duck; he could’ve gone down swinging and let the next administration take the heat for this. But no, he had to show his true colors.
Am I allowed to say that I don’t agree with there being a trans children. And so is the majority of america
Centrist, or Republican?
Do you mean you wouldn’t allow children to transition? Because there will technically always be trans children.
The difference is whether or not they get nigh irreversible changes by going through puberty and slowly watch their bodies warp into something they’re not, or don’t.
This will be his legacy. Opening the door wide open to the wolves and supporting the worst genocide since Rwanda. And he deserves it.
I said it before and it bears repeating: he’ll be remembered as a combination of the worst failures of Neville Chamberlain and Paul von Hindenburg.
That’s it. That’s his legacy. Every other aspect of what he did - positive or negative - pales in comparison.
Stupidity and cowardice.
The defining characteristics of the Biden administration and the centrist wing of the Democratic party.
I think he signed this one because the threat of what is coming is much worse. But I do agree, I wish Biden were a better man than he is.
It really is a shame. His administration did a lot of good stuff and ultimately it’s going to be completely overshadowed by his inaction on a few really important issues.
I don’t know if he could’ve prevented the coming disaster, but he sure as fuck could’ve put us in a better position to weather the storm, and he absolutely did not.
Could he have? Even if he takes drastic action (as an official act, of course), it’s not guaranteed things will turn out better.
But at least he’d have tried… history remembers that too.
The number of times the Democrats have said “We couldn’t have won that vote, so we didn’t push the issue” and I’m like, that’s how you change the conversation! You get Congressional candidates on record as opposing this thing that would have helped. You don’t avoid the issue because you’ll lose.
I think he signed this one because the threat of what is coming is much worse
I think he signed it because he hates all trans people. After a whole-assed year of supplying a genocide, he gets no benefit of the doubt.
That’s possible. Dude is ancient, and has often been on the wrong side of history. Who knows what he actually believes.
The next administration wants the government to shut down and grind to a halt. This is all Biden can do to slow the bleeding.
Here is the full context of the bill for those interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2025
Here is LGBT Nations’ take: https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/12/senate-passes-military-bill-with-provision-restricting-trans-healthcare/?
Biden isn’t the worst president ever, but he’s a piece of shit. He was entirely not up to the task of our time, and that was obvious in 2020. His presidency had more to do with fulfilling an old man’s lifelong desire to sit in the big seat, rather than meet the needs of the citizenry. It was basically a make-a-wish project for establishment Democrats who desire gentlemanly order and aggrandizement more than any meaningful policy goals. This was a group project, and all of the self-interested facilitators that covered up his senility (going back before the 2020 race), are directly culpable in the emerging feudal reign that Republicans are orchestrating, as well as the unjust murders of hundreds of thousands of innocents in Gaza. I started his administration feeling weary but cautiously hopeful that we may have averted calamity. I end his administration having lost confidence in not only our government, but of our people. I could not have more contempt for the entire American project and all the hollow sentiments that cloak the inhumanity of it. Biden is such a clown.
He’s literally patting himself for doing the best job he could instead of bowing out sooner.
What a dumb take. If Harris had been in the Presidential seat, she would have lost by more.
Trump’s fear mongering and lies are all that got him elected. Plain and simple. Putting ANY candidate up against a sitting president for re-election that just lies and says fascist bullshit non-stop is a sure winner.
Fuck no. Biden, Harris, and the Democratic consultancy machine did not run a presidency or a campaign that came within a million miles of supporting that claim.
In a populist age, like we are in, what beats right wing populists (fascists) is left wing populists. The Biden presidency nudged the party in that direction, but neither he nor Harris were capable of running a populist campaign.
The Biden presidency nudged the party in that direction,
Well, the Biden administration briefly entertained some left-wing populist positions, which were unceremoniously jettisoned along with any credibility Democrats once had on the subject.
As Biden just did with the now-ridiculous notion that Democrats support trans people.
Biden made serious progress for unions, consumers, and in antitrust. I’m not putting him up for sainthood, but progress is progress. He was the most progressive president of the last 50 years which, sadly, is a super low bar.
Politics is compromise. Biden is not supreme leader of the United States. He shares power with Republicans. The Republicans will get some wins, and every one of them will be ugly and outrageous. If America wanted to support trans people, they should have elected a Democratic House.
The Republicans will get some wins, and every one of them will be ugly and outrageous. If America wanted to support trans people, they should have elected a Democratic House.
Our Democratic Senate voted overwhelmingly against trans people.
The Senate doesn’t rule any more than the President. The Senate must also compromise with the House. If America doesn’t want Republicans to influence policy, then America has to stop voting for Republicans.
The real question is, why do Republicans choose to use their leverage on this shit? The answer is simple. It allows them to undermine Democrats by splitting the left. Your reaction is the exact reason why trans people just got screwed. You are personally more responsible than anyone in the Senate.
This is not, in general, true, or else everyone would be doing it. Trump is a right-wing populist who’s taking advantage of people’s dissatisfaction with the status quo and the Democrats’ unwillingness to change it. You need both sides for this equation to make sense.
Exactly. The Ds wanted to keep things the way they were, to the point they threw Biden in last minute in 2020 for the Ds to rally around. The Ds had a supermajority with Obama and they did jack shit with it. Unless they abandon the status quo stance they have they will continue to lose, which with Pelosi pushing the old guy over AOC shows they haven’t learned yet and will cling to the way things are until we boot them out with prejudice.
Yes. Neoliberalism fails wherever it is tried, and the US managed to export it across the western world. What’s going on in the US isn’t unique and the same dynamics apply.
Lol, that’s clearly not the take away, but you do you.
Just chiming in to say that if your only counterargument is “lol no,” consider your own stance could be due for reevaluation.
I don’t really strongly agree with either of you, but you’ve thrown in the towel with this bit.
It’s absolutely the takeaway. Did you even read your own link? It’s not about “incumbents” it’s about “establishments”.
Mexico also had an aging president who named a younger woman as his successor in a 2024 election, and she won in a landslide. The difference was that Obrador and Sheinbaum are left populist. That is despite the fact that Mexico is less educated, more religious, and more culturally conservative.
He should have bowed out of the race and let a primary happen, not resigned as president. I agree, any incumbent was fucked, but Harris didn’t have to run as continuation and someone else entirely could avoid the association even further. Democrats need to play to win, and that includes (selectively) throwing kind uncle Joe under the bus if it helps.
I doubt a primary would have even helped. There was no time for a proper full primary. It would have just been through horse trading at the convention. And that process would have inevitably resulted in another centrist geezer empty suit winning the nomination. Populist firebrands aren’t the type that win such back room contests.
Not left when he did and then have a primary. Never ran for a second term.
deleted by creator
As opposed to directly pointing the shotgun at yourself by voting Republican
They don’t point it at themselves, they suck-start it.
Lol, you got em so good! Shotguns to the heads are totally different when it has a blue paintjob!!!
At least you know what to expect with one
At least you know what to expect with one
And what to expect with that one is not good, correct?
Makes sense to go with any other option if that’s the case.
Makes sense to go with any other option if that’s the case.
Third party voters be like.
There’s no other option. It’s damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
What a stupid play. He doesn’t benefit from this and it will now be used as a wedge issue by both Parties to rile up their base. Ignorant shortsighted policy. He’s only encouraging division.
