The US President is motivated entirely by spite and personal benefits vendettas. The only reason to repair the CHIPS act is because it was one of Biden's bigger accomplishments, and Trump can't stand that. That's literally all it is.
Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
11–20 of 64 posts
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#12Just cancel it, make a new Act with a different name and equal purpose, claim victory. Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.
>Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration. For example? Also please show that the major current on-going efforts, like ongoing negotiations, measures in the border etc, were worked upon as intensive as it is now, in the previous administration.
> For example?
USMCA
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#13Paywalled, so how did it go to the frontpage if most people can't read it?
See the archive.is link that someone also provides.
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#14Just cancel it, make a new Act with a different name and equal purpose, claim victory. Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.
>Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration. For example? Also please show that the major current on-going efforts, like ongoing negotiations, measures in the border etc, were worked upon as intensive as it is now, in the previous administration.
Why don’t YOU show those things? That would at least be the start of a good faith discussion and not a whataboutism bias tirade.
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration. For example? Also please show that the major current on-going efforts, like ongoing negotiations, measures in the border etc, were worked upon as intensive as it is now, in the previous administration.
> For example? USMCA
Not sure if you are the same person. But anyway, I cannot read your mind. Please explain your justifications for the claim or please share an article that does it.
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#16Just cancel it, make a new Act with a different name and equal purpose, claim victory. Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.
>Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration. For example? Also please show that the major current on-going efforts, like ongoing negotiations, measures in the border etc, were worked upon as intensive as it is now, in the previous administration.
Trump replaced NAFTA with USMCA during his first term. He claimed it was the best deal ever.
This term, he's claiming the deal is terrible and starting a trade war (which is likely not winnable and probably ends up settling for something approximating NAFTA again).
Which is it? Best deal ever, or crap? He's lying about one.
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration. For example? Also please show that the major current on-going efforts, like ongoing negotiations, measures in the border etc, were worked upon as intensive as it is now, in the previous administration.
Why don’t YOU show those things? That would at least be the start of a good faith discussion and not a whataboutism bias tirade.
Show what things?
Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#18Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#19Re: Repealing the CHIPS Act risks US national security
#20Just cancel it, make a new Act with a different name and equal purpose, claim victory. Seems to be the most likely procedure with the current administration.
Easier: Make some trivial amendment to it (does not need to be ratified), and then just start calling it something else. "It was a disaster, but We Fixed It because I'm your favorite."
Isn't that how they "fixed ACA" last time around? Failed to have the votes to repeal it, so they "saved" it