• Rapidcreek@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The funds for 20 miles of border wall were approved in 2019 before Biden took office. He urged Congress to reassign these funds for more intelligent and efficient enforcement purposes, but Republicans did not comply. Now, Biden has to fulfill his lawful obligations.

    • underisk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      He waived environmental protections with executive powers to expedite the process. He isnt just passively letting this happen because his hands are tied.

      • hedgehog@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Would those environmental protections have allowed the wall to simply not be built, or would they have just delayed it, costing even more money for environmental reviews, changed plans, etc., when a government shutdown is imminent?

        That’s a real question, to be clear, and not one the article answered one way or the other.

        • underisk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Even if it were the case, as they said the budget is already allocated. Why not make them waste as much of it as possible paying for stuff that isn’t building the wall that everyone knows is useless? Making it look like even more of an expensive boondoggle seems like a better strategy than paving the way through federally protected lands.

          And that’s setting aside the costs of maintaining what gets built or what it would cost to remove the wall at some point.

          • crusa187
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            Excellent points. This is completely braindead policy on Biden’s part. The reality is he wanted to give this money to the contractors building the wall, and it’s pathetic crony capitalism per usual.

        • los_chill@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Genuinely curious why he couldn’t go ahead and fund the wall, allow existing environmental law to block it, take that back to congress and say this project is illegal and now it is up to congress to repurpose funds.

        • underisk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          He has to utilize executive fiat to circumvent normal environmental regulation procedures? What exactly do you think would happen if he didn’t?

    • naught@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep, let’s not forget who controls the purse. You just know this is going to get spun 🙄

    • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And the GOP House 100% would have voted to start an impeachment trial if he didn’t follow through on it. They would draw a false equivalence between the extortion scheme against Ukraine that lead to Trump’s first impeachment trial, where one aspect of it was Trump unlawfully withholding congressionally mandated funds, and claim that this is the same thing. Actually, they’ll say this is worse because they’re completely shameless and untethered to reality.

      • ArgentRaven@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s an excellent point. If he doesn’t comply in good faith, it would 100% be in conservative media that he’s sabotaging the borders, misappropriating funds, and haul him off to a real impeachment trial. It’d be the excuse for political theater that they want, and likely exactly why Congress wouldn’t reallocate the funds to something else.

      • guacupado@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re so salty Trump got impeached (twice) that they’re pretty much calling for impeachment for any little thing they don’t like. It’s actually humiliating and I don’t understand how anyone can proudly say they vote for that party. It’s like middle school logic.

    • Belgdore@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like a more creative person would have built an 10 foot long section of wall (or better yet a really fancy gate) valued at whatever amount of money congress had allocated.

      • thefartographer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        That would be like USPS getting $30million to replace a fleet of delivery trucks and instead buying a handful of monster trucks that can’t enter residential areas. No one’s gonna look at that and go, “whoops! You got me! We said buy 120 USPS trucks with the approved budget but instead you bought 5 monster trucks and a sweet set of ramps and said you followed the ‘spirit of the ask’ because they’re all trucks. Well, I see no reason to investigate this for misusing funds! As you were!”

      • bluGill@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It needs to pass an audit. The wall is stupid, but building a monument instead of a wall should fail audits and is a type of corruption worthy of impeachment.

          • bluGill@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I hope they stand for the rule of law. Mind you they should tell us when the law is wrong and fight to get that fixed. However they don’t get to ignore a bad law. There is often disagreement on what makes a good law, and sometimes you will lose that fight (or at least a battle in the fight).

                • Belgdore@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Corruption applies to actions taken for personal gain. Actions taken for perceived benefit of the constituents are noble even if they violate the law.