Current Events > 187 Republicans voted against the CHIPs act

(+) Yeah! (+)

How long until republicans start taking credit for this?

I thought this was going to be about the California Highway Patrol.

<_<

Just skimming the 1000 page bill (https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2022/8/view-the-chips-legislation), my guess is they voted against all the DEI language buried in the text, including the creation of a new "chief diversity officer" of the NSF who would have direct control over university research grants with scoring explicitly factoring in DEI efforts at the university. money set aside to study things like "DEI in AI research.", the creation of a DEI STEM plan for pre-K-through-12 education, and a bunch of other things.

So like any other 1000 page bill, it's jammed with a ton of party policy stuff but being sold as nothing more than a domestic manufacturing bill. That won't stop people from acting like the people voting against it just hate america, but that's exactly the point of burying these things into giant bills so I guess working as intended?

Just skimming the 1000 page bill (https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2022/8/view-the-chips-legislation), my guess is they voted against all the DEI language buried in the text, including the creation of a new "chief diversity officer" of the NSF who would have direct control over university research grants with scoring explicitly factoring in DEI efforts at the university. money set aside to study things like "DEI in AI research.", the creation of a DEI STEM plan for pre-K-through-12 education, and a bunch of other things.

So like any other 1000 page bill, it's jammed with a ton of party policy stuff but being sold as nothing more than a domestic manufacturing bill. That won't stop people from acting like the people voting against it just hate america, but that's exactly the point of burying these things into giant bills so I guess working as intended?

How long until republicans start taking credit for this?

1) You seem to be very quick to find "justifiable" reasons for Republicans to criticize Democratic passed legislation...
2) Are you saying the Republicans voted against this mostly because of the DEI language? As in it was the biggest reason they found fault with it?

1. There's a summary section at the link that gave me an idea of what to look for in the broader text and all I did was a few "ctrl+f" searches and scanning those sections. It really wasn't a lot of work. More importantly, though, I'm not justifying their vote against, just potentially clarifying. I just don't live in a cartoon world where 187 elected representatives are mustache twirling villains who do things for no reason other than to ruin the country. I think we would all be in a much better place when we identify and acknowledge why people support or reject something that, in social media summary, sounds like nothing but good things for all people. That rustles some feathers, though, because debating the relative benefits of specific clauses in a 1000 page bill is a lot harder than going "those people are evil because they don't like this bill as defined by a single sentence headline." It also means acknowledging that sometimes good bills may fail because one party (and yes, republicans do this plenty) shoves in a bunch of stuff that would never fly as a standalone bill into something that's "too big to fail". There's literally no reason to NOT call those cases out. More information can only benefit people who want to be informed on issues.
2. I'm speculating based on my own assumption that at least some of the people voting against a domestic chip manufacturing bill have a reason to vote against it other than "I just hate america". That might not be the reason they voted against it at all, but if I didn't wonder what exactly someone might not like about the bill I wouldn't have found the bill itself nor read up on what exactly it does, either.

House Republican leaders are urging their members to vote against a bipartisan Senate measure that would give tens of billions of dollars to the U.S. makers of semi-conductor computer chips, which they calling a "corporate welfare bill."
...
"At a time when Democrats reckless spending policies have led to historically high inflation, the government should not be injecting hundreds of billions of dollars in additional subsidies into the economy," House Minority Whip Steve Scalise said in in the letter Wednesday night to conference members.

Senate Republicans had tied the fate of the Chips Act to the spending package, which could only pass through the Senates reconciliation process with just Democratic votes.On July 1, McConnell said there would be no Republican votes for any Senate effort towards chips or other innovation-related measures so long as Democrats are pursuing a partisan reconciliation bill. Republicans relented after Manchin said on July 15 that he did not support fellow Democrats effort to increase taxes or pass new climate measures as part of the budget package.

Manchins change of heart on Wednesday appears to have angered Republican leaders who felt like they got the raw end of the deal. Late on Wednesday, House Republican leadership urged their members to vote against the Chips Act in retaliation to Manchins announcement, according to a memo seen by The Hill.

Republicans have stated their rationale for voting against the bill: it's not about DEI, but about inflation fears.
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/house-gop-leadership-tells-members-vote-no-chips-act (this site seems like hot garbage, but I've got no reason to doubt the Scalise quote)
(Also it's because they're mad Manchin waited until after it passed the Senate to support the reconciliation bill)
https://fortune.com/2022/07/28/chips-bill-act-2022-senate-house-vote-results-joe-manchin/

1. There's a summary section at the link that gave me an idea of what to look for in the broader text and all I did was a few "ctrl+f" searches and scanning those sections. It really wasn't a lot of work. More importantly, though, I'm not justifying their vote against, just potentially clarifying. I just don't live in a cartoon world where 187 elected representatives are mustache twirling villains who do things for no reason other than to ruin the country. I think we would all be in a much better place when we identify and acknowledge why people support or reject something that, in social media summary, sounds like nothing but good things for all people. That rustles some feathers, though, because debating the relative benefits of specific clauses in a 1000 page bill is a lot harder than going "those people are evil because they don't like this bill as defined by a single sentence headline." It also means acknowledging that sometimes good bills may fail because one party (and yes, republicans do this plenty) shoves in a bunch of stuff that would never fly as a standalone bill into something that's "too big to fail". There's literally no reason to NOT call those cases out. More information can only benefit people who want to be informed on issues.

2. I'm speculating based on my own assumption that at least some of the people voting against a domestic chip manufacturing bill have a reason to vote against it other than "I just hate america". That might not be the reason they voted against it at all, but if I didn't wonder what exactly someone might not like about the bill I wouldn't have found the bill itself nor read up on what exactly it does, either.