politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is the best summary I could come up with:
One hundred days later, that consensus on Capitol Hill shows signs of fraying, as left-wing Democrats alarmed by the rising human toll of the war in Gaza press to limit aid to Israel or impose strict conditions on it.
It will reach a peak on Tuesday, when the Senate votes on a resolution that would freeze all U.S. security aid to Israel unless the State Department produces a report within 30 days examining whether the country committed human rights violations in its conduct of the war.
But it is only one of a raft of measures that progressives in the Senate have proposed in recent weeks that reflect their uneasiness with Israel’s conduct of the war and raise questions about whether and under what circumstances the United States would send a fresh infusion of funding to back the country.
President Biden in October requested a sweeping emergency national security package including roughly $14 billion to back Israel in the conflict, but debate on that measure has largely focused on the much bigger sum earmarked for Ukraine.
The mounting death toll — along with the road blocks Israel has imposed on getting aid to civilians trapped under bombardment — has inspired protests in the streets of U.S. cities and charges of genocide at the International Court of Justice.
It has also caused hand-wringing in the Biden administration, as senior officials push Israel to wind down military operations and allow more aid in, while maintaining a public posture of support for the war.
The original article contains 1,278 words, the summary contains 251 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!