Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

sensible-med.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 340 posts

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#141

Post by jghn »

mullingitover wrote: post #103
wyager wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the people who did vote for him explicitly voted for all the stuff he's doing right now. Nothing that he's currently doing is surprising , except maybe for the fact that a politician actually followed through on so many campaign promises.

I don’t recall “we’re gonna kill science research, cancer research, we’re gonna make a million poor children die of AIDS and tuberculosis” in any campaign ads.

I remember warnings of all this bullshit going around the socials. Kinda funny how it's playing out *exactly the fuck like those warnings portrayed*.

For those who voted for him I understand the people who are happy about what's happening. Those who claim they didn't "vote for this": they don't deserve to have a vote. The writing was on the wall in clear script.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#142

Post by arp242 »

jmcgough wrote: post #40
D13Fd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not clear what good the midterms can do. It appears likely that the Supreme Court will hold that the president has the power to make these cuts regardless of any laws passed by congress. And even if he didn’t have that power already, he cannot be prosecuted for any official act, and he can pardon his subordinates at will. Beyond that, any action taken by congress is going to be reliant on individuals in the exec…

> roughly half the country is ecstatic about what he is doing A number of his actions are wildly unpopular. The Jan 6th Pardons, and his pro-Putin agenda. His polling is historically poor for a month into a president's term, and there are large protests around the country. In another month, his polling will be completely underwater.

"Only" 58% oppose the pardons according to [1]. I mean, it's a majority, but it's not what I'd call "wildly unpopular". It was always going to be opposed by a vast majority of Democrat voters, so relatively few Republican voters oppose it. I find it rather concerning.

Back in the day much was said about Bush's "historically low" approval ratings too. It was somewhat satisfying to see, but in the end it didn't really seem to matter much. He still got re-elected.

[1]: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-starts-new-term-with-...

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#143

Post by throwaway48476 »

lazide wrote: post #136
jghn wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes it does. The house does not. The senate was always set up to artificially prop up smaller (by population) states. The House was not. But we've artificially capped the House. Now they both favor lower population states.

Those states would never have signed onto the constitution without the senate. It’s not ‘artificial’. It’s a core part of why the USA came to be.

Articles of confederation. This is also why the southern states were called the confederacy.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#144

Post by sterlind »

torstenvl wrote: post #41
bbor wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A) The answer is impeachment -- regardless of partisan policy discussions on what we should do with these agencies, there is a strong legal argument that overruling congress via impoundment and/or the actions discussed here violate the constitutions most basic precepts. Our founders, for better or worse, including one escape valve for such a situation: congress reasserting its power via impeachment. I know recent his…

> there is a strong legal argument that overruling congress via impoundment and/or the actions discussed here violate the constitutions most basic precepts No there isn't. The text of the Constitution says the opposite: it makes appropriation a necessary condition for expenditures, but omits any clause making it a sufficient one. And the only case law on this issue is Train v. New York, which assiduously avoids rulin…

the Take Care clause of Article II would like to have a word with you. The President has a positive duty to faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress. if Congress passes a law funding something, the President must faithfully make it so.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#145

Post by hayst4ck »

bryant wrote: post #2

Practically speaking, when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person applying these policies, what mitigations are left? The courts are themselves slow and ultimately roll up to allies of the despot. People say that the midterms are crucial, but the midterms are only likely to be won if Democrats truly unify and apply winning strategies. Sadly the only winning strategies now seem to involve tell…

We are deeply undemocratic right now. I can consent to differences of opinion on tax policy or government subsidies, but I can't consent to open betrayal of allies. I can't consent to the deliberate traumatiztion of the people who run the government so that unaccountable authority can be wielded without any checks or balances. I can't submit to literal deaths of people who are dependent on public healthcare and their children being robbed of their mother prematurely. I can't submit to a regulatory environment that puts rich Americans above the law. I can't consent to extreme changes in foreign policy or economic intervention that makes it so that our businesses don't have a predictable environment to operate in and foreign countries have no reason to believe our words.

Our own declaration of independence lists our founding principles and tells us what we already know is the answer:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The only answer we have left is to withdrawal consent.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#146

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

jmcgough wrote: post #40
D13Fd wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not clear what good the midterms can do. It appears likely that the Supreme Court will hold that the president has the power to make these cuts regardless of any laws passed by congress. And even if he didn’t have that power already, he cannot be prosecuted for any official act, and he can pardon his subordinates at will. Beyond that, any action taken by congress is going to be reliant on individuals in the exec…

> roughly half the country is ecstatic about what he is doing A number of his actions are wildly unpopular. The Jan 6th Pardons, and his pro-Putin agenda. His polling is historically poor for a month into a president's term, and there are large protests around the country. In another month, his polling will be completely underwater.

> His polling is historically poor for a month into a president's term

You can hate the guy all you like, but this is 100% false.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#147

Post by CamperBob2 »

seattle_spring wrote: post #129
mullingitover wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t recall “we’re gonna kill science research, cancer research, we’re gonna make a million poor children die of AIDS and tuberculosis” in any campaign ads.

His actions were outlined in Project 2025 throughout his candidacy. Surprised all it took was a simple statement of ignorance for people to completely dismiss what was plainly written what was going to happen (and currently is).

"I love the poorly-educated!" was not empty rhetoric. Only a country that gives slow-witted people the same political power as those on the right side of the IQ bell curve could elect a Trump democratically.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#148

Post by seattle_spring »

afavour wrote: post #140
seattle_spring wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right here: https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_CHA...

This is my point, he specifically disavowed Project 2025 while campaigning.

His words disavowed Project 2025, but his actions very obviously supported it. Reminds me of an apt quote:

"I'm not a litigious man... that's why I have lawyers." -- Conrad "Skip" Meinhofer IV

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#149

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

dralley wrote: post #12
jghn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person You're not wrong. However the portrayal of a mandate is a bit of a media fiction. He didn't have notably more votes than any other recent president.

In fact, he had less margin than any election since 2000. Even Hillary in 2016 had a larger popular vote margin of victory than Trump 2024 despite having lost the electoral college.

You seem to be fixated on a vote system that we do not use.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#150

Post by throwaway48476 »

D13Fd wrote: post #126
roenxi wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mechanism seems to rest on the principle of separation of powers - Congress is empowered both to write the laws, and to remove presidents. That means that there can't be a major misalignment between Congress and the executive, because if Congress thinks the president is really out of line they can boot him. It is quite a sophisticated set-up, really. You'd think in principle that the courts would decide when the…

The problem is that, through the pardon power combined with immunity from prosecution, the president can shield the entire executive branch from any obligation to execute on the laws that congress writes. It effectively neuters congress and prevents it from making any permanently effective law. Enforcement is instead left to the whims of the current congress and president at any time (who could be highly partisan Dem…

The constitutional remedy for abuse of pardon power is impeachment. In the model where any two branches can check the 3rd if two are of the same mind then there's nothing to do.
Post reply on HN