2641
Comments (87)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
2
2002corvettez06 2 points ago +3 / -1

It falls under presidential jurisdiction to join such things. Congress can, however, control the spending to programs that could be made from such agreements. And if they require change to US law, those too have to go through congress. You got the alphabet regulatory entities though, but that’s a whole huge can of worms I could go on about. The short of it is they’re used to back door legislate around congress. Things like EPA and FCC. The only say voters get are chairs that are senate approved, but it’s a president appointment and once approved they can’t be removed by anyone else.

6
NadlerShartWaddle [S] 6 points ago +6 / -0

Article II Section II

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur

2
2002corvettez06 2 points ago +2 / -0

I am pretty sure nothing in the Paris Agreement is binding, which was a big point Trump made when pointing out China and Russia were making out like bandits. A lot of countries seemed to have promised a status quo. What Obama submitted were promises of ends which he then attempted to proceeded to pursue within the bounds of US law. What he did commit were within the president's power to do so.

TLDR: Paris Agreement isn't a treaty.

3
RussianAgent13 3 points ago +3 / -0

The president can join whatever he wants but they require change to law to force individuals and companies to do anything. I expect anything the EPA does to get challenged.

1
vote_for_MAGA_2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Unfortunately, the entire govt is so overgrown, bloated, and corrupt that we have no idea what’s actually going on anywhere with anything. There’s tons of ways that money can be shipped out of the country and all they have to do is point to “Paris accords” to justify it.

1
Women4Trump2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Don’t the Democrats control the spending bills without needing to get past the filibuster? What a racket. Sad times for our country.

2
2002corvettez06 2 points ago +2 / -0

They can use what is reconciliation to not need 60 votes, but it can only be used once a year. Republicans used it in 2017 to pass the tax reform bill.

1
Women4Trump2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ohhh I see so only once a year. No more trillion plus spending bills for 2021 at least

1
Women4Trump2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

What would the Dems need to do to end the filibuster?

2
2002corvettez06 2 points ago +2 / -0

Bills to change the rules of the senate only need a simple majority, meaning 51 votes. They can use that to change the rules that certain things need 60 votes to pass. At 50/50 Kamala would break the tie. This is why Joe Manchin is the most powerful politician right now in the US