this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2026
473 points (99.4% liked)

politics

27040 readers
3108 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
 

The cuts to several states come amid an escalating fraud fallout fueled by a dubious YouTube investigation of Minnesota day cares.

The Trump administration on Monday said it had slashed billions in social services funds to a handful of blue states as part of its escalating response to new and unproven fraud allegations in Minnesota.

The Department of Health and Human Services will freeze $10 billion worth of federal grants to California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York, an HHS official told HuffPost, confirming news first reported by The New York Post.

It’s not clear whether the freeze was inspired by specific fraud allegations or solely for political reasons. Officials did not immediately provide a public explanation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wide_eyed_stupid@lemmy.world 63 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Why would blue states still pay into the federal government when they're not getting anything out of it anymore? Seems to me they're financing their own abusive relationship. I don't understand how this works. Aren't blue states the only reason these crappy red states are even still slightly functional?

I'm not American but it seems to me that collectively the blue states would hold a lot of power if they're the financial backbone of the country. Can't they swing their weight around a little?

[–] AlternatePersonMan@lemmy.world 47 points 3 days ago

You would think. Our stupid country has senators based on statehood rather than representation of population. The pocket of Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana has ~3.5 million people combined, yet has 4x the voting power of California which has 10x the population. It's a garbage system.

Also if you look at virtually any statistic by state. Red states are a dumpster fire. Literacy, STDs, teen pregnancy, income, obesity, etc.

Only a complete fucking moron could be a republican. The evidence of their failure and unnecessary cruelty is overwhelming.

[–] pheonixdown@sh.itjust.works 22 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Taxes levied by the US federal government are against individuals and businesses directly. States also levy their own taxes independently. So these funds paid to the federal government (largely) don't go through state hands.

[–] wide_eyed_stupid@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Ah I see. Then it makes sense. The population itself would have to stop paying taxes. That's a bit more complicated because then individuals would be sanctioned by the government and people probably don't want to take that risk.

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago

They could withhold taxes on state employees. That would be easy. If they wanted to go full second civil war, They could pass laws making it illegal for companies to pay taxes to the federal government.

[–] Insekticus@aussie.zone 5 points 3 days ago (3 children)

So the states can just say "hey everyone, until we say to resume, just dont bother paying your federal taxes anymore and we'll keep the feds outside our borders"?

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 days ago

What are they gonna do, build a wall?

[–] greybeard@feddit.online 4 points 2 days ago

Individuals don't pay their own taxes, their employers do. When you "pay your taxes" at the end of the year, you are just paying difference between what you should have paid and what you did pay. The exception being contract workers.

And if you don't pay your taxes, the government can just seize the money from your bank accounts. Of course, if everybody stopped paying, employers included, the federal government would have a hard time processing it all, but if it wasn't a sudden massive stop, they would just start raiding people's bank accounts, probably without due process.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Except they can't physically keep the federal government away their people, just look at what ICE is doing. It would also prevent people from traveling out of state, or risk getting arrested in a red state.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You are correct. Unfortunately, state governments don't have a hand in federal taxation. Employers typically withhold the estimated amount from employee's paychecks, and at the beginning of each year everyone submits a tax form. If they paid over their obligation, they get a refund; if they underpaid, they owe money.

Even if someone opts out of tax withholdings, they're responsible for sending their taxes to the federal government each year; typically through a third-party for-profit business (especially now that Republicans trashed the recent IRS pilot which allowed people to file their taxes directly to the federal government for free).

The only solution would be for every resident of that state to individually opt out of federal tax withholdings from their employer, but then they'd be individually liable for submitting their taxes each year. While the IRS doesn't currently have the staffing to handle that if everyone does it, that would require a level of collective trust-in-ones-fellows that simply doesn't exist in this era.

It would be much better if states could offer their protection, but apparently states can't even keep ICE out so the IRS would be no different...

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

I already do this because they seize my refund to pay off student loans.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago

That sucks, dude

[–] rayyy@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Even MAGAs are so upset with this regime that they are proposing a tax strike. This seems like a cause everyone could support.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I was kinda anti tax evasion (even legal tax evasion) prior to the second Trump admin. Nowadays, I'm in support of everyone doing their best to send as little money to the federal government as possible.

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

FYI "legal tax evasion" is called tax avoidance. It's a form of direct action against a government that doesn't represent you at all.

I'm happy to pay my California taxes.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I'm happy to pay my California taxes.

Same

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 3 points 2 days ago

Can't they swing their weight around a little?

Well, they could, MAGAs don't mind abusing their authority at all, even when they DON'T have it, but Dems think its impolite, and people are watching, and demonstrating politeness and non-confrontational dialogue are the most important things to Democratic leaders, even more than winning races and protecting American Democracy from corrupt traitors, pedophiles, and rapists. Smugness is all-important.