• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Links $1.9 Billion in State Disaster Funds to Israel Boycott Stance

madman

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
13,680
Reaction score
11,086
Location
So. California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Yeah, there's absolutely nothing wrong here.
conform or die!

/s



WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. states and cities that boycott Israeli companies will be denied federal aid for natural disaster preparedness, the Trump administration has announced, tying routine federal funding to its political stance.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency stated in grant notices posted on Friday that states must follow its "terms and conditions." Those conditions require they certify they will not sever “commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies” to qualify for funding.
The requirement applies to at least $1.9 billion that states rely on to cover search-and-rescue equipment, emergency manager salaries and backup power systems among other expenses, according to 11 agency grant notices reviewed by Reuters.
The requirement is the Trump administration's latest effort to use federal funding to promote its views on Israel.
The Department of Homeland Security, the agency that oversees FEMA, in April said that boycotting Israel is prohibited for states and cities receiving its grant funds.
FEMA separately said in July that U.S. states will be required to spend part of their federal terrorism prevention funds on helping the government arrest migrants, an administration priority.
The Israel requirement takes aim at BDS, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement designed to put economic pressure on Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian territories. The campaign's supporters grew more vocal in 2023, after Hamas attacked southern Israel and Israel invaded Gaza in response.
“DHS will enforce all antidiscrimination laws and policies, including as it relates to the BDS movement, which is expressly grounded in antisemitism,” a spokesperson for Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said in a statement.
The requirement is largely symbolic. At least 34 states already have anti-BDS laws or policies, according to a University of Pennsylvania law journal. The BDS Movement did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The American Jewish Committee supports the Trump administration's policy, said Holly Huffnagle, the group's director of antisemitism policy. The AJC is an advocacy group that supports Israel.

Under one of the grant notices posted on Friday, FEMA will require major cities to agree to the Israel policy to receive a cut of $553.5 million set aside to prevent terrorism in dense areas.
New York is due to receive $92.2 million from the program, the most of all the recipients. Allocations are based on the agency’s analysis of “relative risk of terrorism,” according to the
 
How do you know when your country is becoming a dictatorship?
 
The Federal Government can attach a wide array of requirements to receipt of federal funding....

....which states, municipalities, and others need to consider when they are deciding whether or not to become dependent on those funds.
 
The Federal Government can attach a wide array of requirements to receipt of federal funding....

Not really.

I mean, you people are post-law so you do as you please. But the Roberts Court put limits on that.

But it’s the Roberts Court so who knows? They do whatever please as well.
 
The Federal Government can attach a wide array of requirements to receipt of federal funding....
This is the kind of thing dictators do.
....which states, municipalities, and others need to consider when they are deciding whether or not to become dependent on those funds.
I guess the United States of America are not as united as they once were.
 
The Federal Government can attach a wide array of requirements to receipt of federal funding....

....which states, municipalities, and others need to consider when they are deciding whether or not to become dependent on those funds.
When has the federal government attached foreign policy concerns to domestic spending?
 
Not really.

I mean, you people are post-law so you do as you please. But the Roberts Court put limits on that.

Not sure the United States is "post-law" *just* yet - but I'm not tracking the Roberts Court limiting this, unless you're referring to the forced Medicaid expansion attempt?
 
The Federal Government can attach a wide array of requirements to receipt of federal funding....

....which states, municipalities, and others need to consider when they are deciding whether or not to become dependent on those funds.
And just like that, conservatives stopped pretending to care about our constitutional rights.
 
And just like that, conservatives stopped pretending to care about our constitutional rights.
1. As I stated, I think this is a destructive and terrible precedent.
2. States do not have a Constitutional right to federal funds.


You know how Conservatives keep warning ya'll that if you keep expanding the government's power, one day it's gonna wind up being used for purposes you don't like....?
 
So you either support dissolving the military or don’t understand your own argument.

The solution to your problem is to not elect selfish, hateful leaders who use the government as a weapon.
 
So you either support dissolving the military or don’t understand your own argument.

That is not at all a logical implication of what I wrote.

The solution to your problem is to not elect selfish, hateful leaders who use the government as a weapon.

No, because a system that relies on "It's Okay Because Our Elected Officials Will Always Be Good People" is a system designed to fail. The answer is not to give Government too much power, make sure you centralize only as much as necessary, and keep power checked by power throughout the system.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…