this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
500 points (99.8% liked)

politics

22655 readers
3775 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary:


The Senate voted Thursday to strike down a rule capping most bank overdraft fees at $5, a measure adopted late last year by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that had been expected to save Americans billions of dollars per year.

Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, was the lone Republican to oppose the resolution, which passed on a nearly party-line vote, 52-48. It will now move to the House, where Representative French Hill, the Arkansas Republican who leads the Financial Service Committee, introduced a parallel resolution last month.

The rule would have limited the fees banks and credit unions could charge when customers spend more than they have in their accounts, typically $35 per overdraft. The bureau estimated it would save American households $5 billion a year. It was immediately challenged in court by banking trade groups.


Personal opinon:

Call your bank and tell them to turn off overdraft protection now.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Pretty sure it was Ezra Klein on the weekly show podcast with Jon Stewart. He went into detail about how even just distributing the funds for the broadband bill was just this Kafka-esque insane seven year process of infinite subcommittees and public review processes, and that was what Democrats wrote for themselves; it wasn't made that way by Republicans to make it shitty, Dems happily blew their own feet off by making the bill's workings as tortured and slow as possible.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Yes, that was it thanks

Certainly a big criticism of democrats has been they get nothing done but if you look at the legislation they really did get some far reaching improvements codified ….. but then it takes years to implement so no one sees the results and the next president can cancel programs before anything is done.

One of the programs I was really frustrated by was building out EV chargers. Republicans had started complaining about nothing being done and the explanation was partly that it required states to figure out how to use it, but this could have been transformative for the EV transition. Now very little was done, the current president cancelled the program and started reneging on its commitments

Last summer I went on a 1,200 mile road trip in an EV and had no problems. But that was in the NorthEast where a lot of charging infrastructure has been built out. We really need to jump start this in a lot of the US where they don’t have the population for it to be immediately profitable. People need to think of it like highways, we don’t just build highways between cities where there’s enough population to make it worthwhile: we know that we’re all stronger with easier travel everywhere. Similarly, you should be able to refuel your vehicle everywhere you can travel with it