Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

blxckhoodie999 t1_j0jeuwo wrote

> part of a broader defense spending bill

> illegal…to buy, sell, transport or even possess…fins

super glad about this, but how did we get here from defense spending hahaha.


AmethystOrator OP t1_j0jf340 wrote

I don't know, politics are sometimes like that. I only know that as part of a defense bill there's no way Biden doesn't sign this.


Ixosis t1_j0jgfln wrote

If ya really want something passed, and it can be tacked onto the defense spending bill, it's guaranteed to pass. Not all things can be tacked on, though


StargazingJuniper t1_j0jhg07 wrote

The annual Farm Bill get a lot of weird riders like this because it's something politicians have decided is always a must pass bill


gimpwiz t1_j0jufpg wrote

Biden would have signed it standalone, I am 98% sure. It doesn't seem like 'shark fin trade yes please' is on his agenda. Presidents tend not to use veto power for stuff that isn't particularly important to their agenda, so ...


ssfbob t1_j0jp6zn wrote

Things that have nothing to do with the law being proposed often get slipped in.


half3clipse t1_j0jmaaq wrote

major 'must pass' bills get all kinds of riders because they're a good chance for horse trading. reb bob wants something on their pet issue and if it gets included as a rider, he'll will support rep carols thing, who will support rep Alice' thing, which will make some allied rep of alice happy and stop blocking yet another thing.

you don't get that done across multiple bills easily, it takes one bill not passing to fuck up the quid pro quo. throw it all in one bill however and it all gets done at once.

its also good for getting Congress critters to buy into the important bill. if someone throws a last minute stink. they're not just delaying the important bill, but pissing off everyone who got their thing added as a rider. at that point it's not just "we need to pass this bill" but "I spent a bunch of effort negotiating riders that might not end up included in the next version of this doesn't pass". plus anyone who got something added as a rider is unlikely to create problems for the main bill.

sometimes it's also just a good chance to deal with small issues that aren't going to make it to a vote on their own. no one's going to object to it being passed, but there's not enough will power to actually get it done. getting it tacked onto a bill that's definitely being passed makes it more feasible.


just-the-doctor1 t1_j0ji2nx wrote

Sounds like it’s a rider.

My bet is that it’s a concession made by the people trying to get the Bill to pass to get more votes.


God_Damnit_Nappa t1_j0jsa25 wrote

These big, must pass bills are always bloated with these completely unrelated bills. Even the most hardcore shark hater isn't going to vote against the defense bill to shoot this down.


Noob_DM t1_j0jsibp wrote

The US Navy does a ton of work in naval enforcement, right of navigation, and other essential duties to keep trade freely and legally flowing across the ocean.


MundaneFacts t1_j0l22n8 wrote

Yep. This is obviously just a rider, but the Coast Guard will be affected by this.


Miakemi t1_j0l22px wrote

Riders on bills are like politician passion projects. They either get something super specific that they want or they use it to sink an otherwise good/important bill or as a political weapon (a while ago Republicans stuck CHIP renewal to a bill the Democrats we’re refusing to sign right before the program was going to expire and then billed it as Democrats being monsters for not wanting to cover child healthcare).

Plus, line item veto by the president was found unconstitutional at some point, so if the bill passes, the rider passes. In this case, it’s a good thing but


Criticalhit_jk t1_j0kq4nf wrote

Because they're foreign caught fins - this is a targetted ban


Redqueenhypo t1_j0lsc2c wrote

This happens constantly in politics, it’s just a weird thing. The original law will be about increasing school funding and then a bunch of riders about manatees and tractor safety will get attached.


benji_90 t1_j0kr12i wrote

No one expects the Finnish inquisition


Apokolypse09 t1_j0jgmyr wrote

My guess the "defense" part would be trying to enforce the ban but its not like China is just gonna stop the practice because the US bans it.