Yes, they just want secure coverage. Kinda like what Scalise has.

From this article: “Lots of people don’t detect that he’s lying about what has transpired, but they think he’s full of hot air about what he wants. But in reality, he’s a total liar about what has happened, and he’s deadly sincere about what it is he wants.” Joe from NY (now professor in U.K.)

Thanks for the alert, but this post should be updated - the Fed has since thwarted the plot, for now at least. Credit @justinwolfers.bsky.social who spoke about this with @jenrubin.bsky.social on The Contrarians www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/p...

Who could have known that more people covered spreads risk and lowers costs? Genius!

I'm still pissed at all the Dems who voted for this abomination.

Is anyone keeping a list of all the things to CHANGE once Dems are back in power? This should be on that list.

This article is a great adjunct to the work of @brian-goldstone.bsky.social, author of There is No Place for Us, and of Matthew Desmond, author of Evicted and of Poverty, by America. All should be required reading. These problems are at the heart of the demise of our democracy.

Everyone should watch this and read your book! One surprising fact that your book, along with Matthew Desmond's books Evicted and Poverty by America, illustrate is how expensive it is to be poor in America. It's so gut wrenching and infuriating, but it's also a policy choice. We must do better.

What about the opening phrase of clause 4(b) of the amendment ("In response to congressional redistricting in Texas in 2025. . .")? Could that be used as a condition for the enforceability of the CA maps, if the TX redistricting is struck down?