Auron Macintyre covered this in a recent podcast, the CRS is baked into the civil rights act so it's required to be funded untill the 1964 civil rights act is overturned. It was previously defunded, but it's not legislatively possible to get rid of it as it's built into the structure of the budget. (this is by design of course, it's not an oversight on the creators part)
The bill looks like a massive omnibus, you can't pass a budget without refunding this department. It needs to be manually and specifically defunded, but it can't be removed.
This is similar to the systemically mass import illegals, but they can only go out 1 at a time after due process. It's rigging the game in their favour.
Also, actually reading the section does it actually provide funds? or does it just allow the attorney general to provide up to 20 mil based on their say so?
For necessary expenses of the Community Relations Service, $20,000,000: Provided
This is the part that I am unclear on, what the grammar does to the meaning in legislative bills.
I will watch the segment later but I'm not 100% this is a resurrection of it.
Is there more to this?
Auron Macintyre covered this in a recent podcast, the CRS is baked into the civil rights act so it's required to be funded untill the 1964 civil rights act is overturned. It was previously defunded, but it's not legislatively possible to get rid of it as it's built into the structure of the budget. (this is by design of course, it's not an oversight on the creators part)
The bill looks like a massive omnibus, you can't pass a budget without refunding this department. It needs to be manually and specifically defunded, but it can't be removed.
This is similar to the systemically mass import illegals, but they can only go out 1 at a time after due process. It's rigging the game in their favour.
Also, actually reading the section does it actually provide funds? or does it just allow the attorney general to provide up to 20 mil based on their say so?
This is the part that I am unclear on, what the grammar does to the meaning in legislative bills.
I will watch the segment later but I'm not 100% this is a resurrection of it.
Sure it is, new laws can amend current laws.
He obviously meant that you can't get rid of it from the budget without passing a new law to overturn it.
A new law, like the omnibus bill?
Yeah, they had a fine opprotunity to kill it for good, but Republicans instead sponsored it.
No I mean it's inserted into the mandatory spending.
Might be necessary for the house of representative rules or something, but congress can pass a law that says whatever they want.
If they pass this, it is because they want it there or didn't notice.