this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
299 points (99.3% liked)

politics

22674 readers
3454 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

Senators Chuck Grassley and Maria Cantwell introduced the bipartisan Trade Review Act of 2025 to reassert Congress’s authority over tariffs, following Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff announcements.

The bill would require the president to justify new tariffs and submit an economic impact analysis. Congress must approve tariffs within 60 days or they expire; it could also revoke them anytime.

Grassley’s support signals growing Republican concern over Trump’s trade policies.

The bill echoes the War Powers Act (1973), underscoring fears that unchecked trade actions harm U.S. allies, exports, and consumers.

top 42 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 108 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Too late you stupid fucks. Market is in free fall. Futures are down 1,000 points and Monday morning after the really big tariffs come into effect, we will see probably the top 3 stock market crashes of all time if not the biggest.

[–] cheeseandrice@lemm.ee 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Easy to buy the dip if you can cause the dip.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 2 days ago

Easy to cause a dip if you are a dip.

[–] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

This is how they spurn a recovery and Trump and Co all make huge bank. No way they didn't sell off ahead of the announcement they all knew was coming.

Or do we somehow know they didn't do this?

[–] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 76 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is stupid. The president only can enact tariffs in the interest of national security. If these spineless fucks ever bothered to do their fucking job in the first place we wouldn't be here.

[–] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 26 points 2 days ago (2 children)

losers confirming his nominees, only cory booker has done anything to really stall him. the senate is looking mighty complicit

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 19 points 2 days ago (2 children)

only cory booker has done anything to really stall him

He really didn't. What he did was impressive, but it was just a show. He wasn't even filibustering anything. It was just a signal to voters that at least someone wants to do something.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 32 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Booker was auditioning to replace the cowardly, weak, simpering weenie Chuck Schumer. He needs to leave the Senate in disgrace, and let AOC take his seat, and have Booker take his position as Dem Leader. I'm no fan of Booker, but nobody else is strong enough to step up.

Fuck that creep Schumer. I'll never forgive him for stabbing Al Franken in the back.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Cory Booker isn't my favorite, but he's far from my least favorite. He would certainly be a palatable senate leader for me.

That’s more or less where I’m at on Booker, too. Absolutely not my favorite, but a damn sight better than what we have now. Though, admittedly, the bar one would need to jump over to be better than what we have now is in the basement.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most of that blood was on Gillibrand's hands.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh, I'm aware. She wanted to clear the decks for her presidential run, and she knew Franken would be a nearly unbeatable candidate. Schumer is her state-mate, and Senate leader, and he did the dirty work for her.

Then her campaign flamed out in a few weeks. They ruined a good man's life for NOTHING. They're both backstabbing whores.

Best article about their unforgiveable duplicity:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/29/the-case-of-al-franken

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I wouldn't say they ruined his life. He started touring as a comedian again and has a successful podcast now. It ended his career in the senate, but he seems to still be doing all right.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He has recovered, but it isn't the life he wanted or the kind of enormous positive influence on America that he wanted to make.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

the life he wanted

Maybe, maybe not. If you offered me the presidency right now, I would take it.

It's not the life I want. I'm not qualified. But I'd do it for my country. After all, the bar on qualifications is absudly low right now.

It's entirely likely Al Franken was doing the same.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 0 points 2 days ago

Yep, it was an ineffectual stunt.

[–] Aphelion@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

Cory Booker did his filibuster stunt the same day he was scheduled to be leading a senate subcommittee inquiry into the same tech companies who are his largest donors.

Don't be fooled, it was a clever distraction designed for the optics.

So he just issues new tariffs every sixty days take the godsdamned reins back already

[–] mPony@kbin.earth 50 points 2 days ago (4 children)

A bill.

So, anyone remember who has to sign a bill for it to become law? Anyone at school the day they taught that? Maybe there was a cute cartoon and a song on TV explaining this.

[–] iamjackflack@lemm.ee 40 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Not that it’s going to get enough support due to republicans falling in line, but you do realize that even if the president doesn’t sign or abstains it can still by passed by the house and congress right? It doesn’t stop at the president.

But you may be right, we already are totally doomed as it is.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

If it passes at all, we need to pay attention to how many votes there are for it. It takes a 2/3 threshold in both houses to override a veto. If the passing margin is anywhere near that, there will be enormous popular pressure to get the last few votes for an override after the President vetoes it....

.... which will screw over those last few on the fence, because the J6 nutters will know who they are, and they already attacked Congress once. I hope their home state can give them good law enforcement protection, because the Federal Government won't.

[–] SomeKindaName@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Are you saying violence is an effective way to influence our government? Sounds like it may work better than voting.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Normally violence wouldn't be an effective way to influence government, but our President has just broadcasted that violence that supports him gets a free pass, at least while he can hand out pardons as if they were candy (or perhaps Fentanyl).

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

That reminds me, I have to sharpen my guillotine.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 5 points 2 days ago

One of Trump's favorite shitty moves is directing the Secret Service not to protect you.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago

Sadly, I would bet that they did not know that.

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago

If it's truly bipartisan, they might be able to get enough votes to override.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

If they're willing to take democratic signatures then Trump can't stop it.

[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Who knew giving all your power to a dictator could go wrong?

[–] wirebeads@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

As someone who still has time with the markets and their investments, I’m glad I’m not looking to pull from my investments as of yet.

That being said, I feel sorry for anyone that’s invested in the US market heavily right now and needs that cash.

Maybe instead of Trump mocking “Sleepy Joe Biden”, he should stop raping the markets and resign.

But this is just Trump doing Trump things. Absolute moron of a human being and unfortunately there were more than 77 million bigger morons that followed a rapist blindly into leadership.

Anyways enjoy your Idaho grown bananas, mangos, and coffee when the tariffs hit next week.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Now's the time to buy. The wealthy know this, that's why HitlerPig is doing it. He's done the same thing each month since his inauguration. It's deliberate market manipulation.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I dunno if right this second is the time to buy. The market has some settling to do over the coming months.

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Wealthy investors know to buy on the dip.

Of course that's assumming that there will be a quick recovery. If this bullshit sends us into a depression, they may have outsmarted themselves.

[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Buying the dip does not mean to purchase stock anytime number goes down. It means buy when you think something other than market forces are affecting a stock that you believe will make a quick recovery.

We are not in dip territory, we are in recession territory. An old saying is don't try and catch a falling knife. It's better to let it hit the floor before picking it back up, and we're still a ways from hitting the floor.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The S&P 500 is still up year-over-year. There's a lot of pain on the way as responses and consequences roll out; this isn't bottoming out in a week.

This is the part of the rollercoaster where the ascent finishes and gravity takes over. Of course the long term metrics don’t reflect what’s happening yet.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 days ago

anytime

\sigh

[–] gamer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

Congress must approve tariffs within 60 days or they expire;

Booker is sweating bullets right now

[–] barneypiccolo@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago

He already submitted an "economic analysis." He said the country is going to "boom."

Now the MAGA Senate can vote for it in good conscience.