The 15:
- Allred TX
- Caraveo CO
- Case HI
- Cuellar TX
- Davis (NC)
- Golden (ME)
- Gonzalez, V. TX
- Lee (NV)
- Moskowitz FL
- Panetta CA
- Perez WA
- Schneider IL
- Suozzi NY
- Torres (CA)
- Wasserman Schultz FL
Thanks. Came here for this
If the Senate rejects it, the bill will be reread on January 21st, passed by both houses, and signed by Trump. Elections have consequences. There is no end to the consequences the United States and the rest of the entire Western world is about to experience.
Why are people surprised?
Biden and a lot more Dems already claimed this with UNRWA…
Did y’all never read First They Came For?
We didn’t stand by one subgroup, now our larger subgroup is smaller than the fascists. And they’re gonna keep picking off subgroups.
You can’t fight fascism with people who agree that certain groups are worth targeting.
They definitely want to get ride of the church of satanism. Then they can hang up all their propaganda without that thorn.
If it can be used against all churches, it might almost be worth it.
Hopefully it is that poorly/fairly written. I would hope something obviously biased towards christianity wouldn’t have passed but who knows nowadays.
Have you not been paying attention “white Christian nationalism only” first they came for the Arabs then go the Jews…
Making megachurches that get involved in politics pay taxes? Silver lining.
Nah this is specifically written to target non profits that “support terrorism” and political churches are committing the good kind of tax fraud
State sponsor churches will be exempt what aren’t you getting.
For real, the main tenet of fascism is the law only applies to whom power doesn’t like. Those in power will openly and flagrantly transgress the law because doing so and getting away with it validates their position in their eyes. The fear instilled by their use of violence to silence people disproportionately isnt a nuance to delegitamize, it’s a feature front and center on their brand.
Fascists don’t have morals. You can’t treat fascists like they were a normal group that respects social dynamics, because decorum only applies if both parties respect it. If one side decides to not play by the normal rules, then decorum will be used to hang you, because you are bound by it and predictable, easy to outmaneuver. The way to handle a fascist is the same as when you need to put the family dog down. It’s your duty. It’s not a joy, you take no pleasure in it, you make no speeches, you don’t waste time, just dispatch them. no monologues. End it. Fascism has to made afraid to show it’s face, or it’s going to eat all our faces.
Reading the comments here make me sad. People are so opposed to reading the underlying material and don’t see that media making claims like “nonprofit killing bill” is tricking them into clicking on the website.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/9495/text/rh
- Administrative Review by the IRS Independent Office of Appeals (Subparagraph E):
If the Secretary of the Treasury designates an organization as a terrorist supporting organization (e.g., under tax-related laws), the organization has the right to challenge this designation within the IRS’s Independent Office of Appeals. This process will follow procedures similar to how disputes involving IRS decisions are generally handled, as governed by Section 7803(e) of the Internal Revenue Code.
This section allows for an independent review of the dispute by a body separate from the original decision-makers.
- Jurisdiction of U.S. District Courts (Subparagraph F):
Exclusive Jurisdiction: U.S. district courts are granted exclusive jurisdiction to review a final determination about an organization’s designation as a terrorist supporting organization.
Lemmy let’s be better and have some substantive arguments against this bill. Instead instantly being anti establishment/government.
My arguments for the bill: seemly good determination of a terrorist organization and obviously nonprofits that support terrorist organizations should be tax-exempt.
It’s funny you accuse us of not reading when it’s obvious you didn’t read the article or Raskin’s criticism of the law. Hint: what you posted is covered.
What the fuck are you talking about?
