Just hours after passing the very first bill of the new Congress on Wednesday — one designed to roll back a range of environmental and consumer regulations — House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., celebrated with a corporate lobbying firm at a fundraiser for his campaign committee.
The vote on the Midnight Rules Relief Act of 2017 took place at 4:48 p.m. on Wednesday. The fundraiser, at the offices of the BGR Group, a major lobbying firm, started at 7 p.m.
The bill would amend existing law to allow Congress to repeal en masse multiple regulations finalized since the end of May last year. The law is believed to be aimed at rolling back a rule designed to deter mining companies from polluting drinking water sources, rules designed to curb hazardous methane emissions from fracking sites, and a rule that extends the threshold for overtime pay to workers, among others.
BGR Group represents Chevron, Celgene Corp, the Consumer Technology Association, Eli Lilly & Co., Gilead Sciences, Johnson & Johnson, Raytheon, Southern Company, and Xerox, among many other clients, and has helped a number of clients work on regulatory policy.
The high-dollar event had a $10,000 price tag for each sponsor of the event, $2,500 for each political action committee, and $1,500 per individual, according to an invitation obtained by the Center for Media and Democracy and shared with The Intercept.
Bridget Gribbin, a fundraiser for Speaker Ryan who helped organize the event, declined to comment, but a representative of the BGR Group confirmed that Ryan attended.
Lobbyists are particularly eager to use the newly empowered Republican Congress to sweep away the environmental, financial, labor and consumer-oriented rules implemented by the Obama administration.
The U.S Chamber of Commerce, the lobbying trade group for large firms like Google and Goldman Sachs, made the Midnight Rules Relief legislation a top priority. Other trade groups representing a wide swath of business interests, such as the National Federation of Independent Businesses, have also lobbied in support of the measure.
The first week of legislative action for the 115th Congress began with a thwarted attempt by Republicans to gut the Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent body that investigates misconduct, in particular between lawmakers and lobbyists. After a public outcry, the GOP dropped the attempt to weaken the office.
The key paragraph here:
“Lobbyists are particularly eager to use the newly empowered Republican Congress to sweep away the environmental, financial, labor and consumer-oriented rules implemented by the Obama administration.”
Lobbyists mingle and party for personal gain and politicians seek to gain from it too. This won’t change no matter who’s in office.
The question should be: do the people benefit?
From a constitutional conservative perspective, less regulation is a step towards greater liberty and should strengthen the free market.
Paul Ryan could most easily play Damien in “The Omen V”.
WOW. they are just completely shameless! I can only hope that Bernie’s insistence on speaking the unmanipulated truth and his new media popularity will awaken the people to what’s been happening to them for decades. the republicans are accustomed to NO ONE in Washington tattling on them. that’s how they’ve been getting away with this stuff. there’s been a collusion between the old guard republicans and the neo libs ever since Bill Clinton in the 90’s. Now the Progressive wing of the party, emboldened by Bernie’s epic run, are gonna start doing the kind of truth telling that collapses evil empires. “evil is what happens when good men (and women) do nothing.” Time for the good guys to get a plan.
Obama has been setting records in new regulation since the election even after being asked by congress to stop. This has already been widely reported and congress said due to the mths it would take to sift through the mountain of new regulations which can be dismissed due to their timing that they (congress) would pass legislation to stop them en masse. So they did what they said they would in response to obamas attempt to overwhelm the system. None of which has anything to do with where he spent his time afterwards.
Oh, Is Bridgette the reason Obama got everything and more than he asked from Ryan who had control of the purse strings? Just asking?
here is a link to complement the great article
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzrYMEvAEyw&t=609s
Who cares if he parties with them. He’s a republican thus, we R’s don’t believe in most of the policies of liberal-democrats, especially from the EPA.
Sorry, I just don’t understand what the story is here.
Regulatory capture is the point. Perhaps if you weren’t so proud of your idiotic groupthink, you’d learn a thing or two?
And that is the BIGGEST PROBLEM and why articles like this are so important, necessary! For those individuals, Americans, whom desire facts, actions of our leaders, to be presented, reported to them. For rational, thinking individuals that like to be presented with the “story behind the story”, the motives, incentives, behind the actions taking by our elected officials, leaders. I guess, in order to appreciate the importance of articles, information like this, one would have to understand ( and the majority of Americans do) that information, facts should be taken with an “open mind”. One must be able to “freely” (free thinker) process, evaluate the information presented, not enter into an article with mindset of my club, my side (R’s)…. good, your side (awful liberal, left wing dishonest media) ….bad!! Please try and understand one has nothing to do with the other, when you are reading facts, being presented with the truth!! News shouldn’t always make you feel good, or justified. If it does than you need to look into where and from whom you are receinjng your news. You shouldn’t attack an article based on how you have chosen to identify yourself, and you feel your side is being attacked, because someone is making you aware of your “R” leaders actions, actions that can have real life consequences on Americans!! Proclaiming your allegiance to the “R’s”, doesn’t excuse you and your responsibility to critical, reasonable, rational thinking, may explain the lack thereof, (as was displayed today), but does, by no means, excuse it!!
Good article.keep up the good work.very timely
Yes,
BGR is a typical funder of republicans.
That is why they have given money to Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer,
and about 17 other “democrat” republican candidates in 2016.
We all know that Paul Ryan is as such not a crooked fellow, and much as some people dislike him they should give him the benefit of doubt, same as they have given people like Bill Clinton and Barrack H Obama. Both of them also had many, many faults, and one of them sent me countless emails asking for five-dollar donations despite my antipathy for people like him. Anyway, if anyone has any grudge towards Paul Ryan, please forgive him as a New Year gift, but remember not to vote for him next time. He is a very vacillating kind of fellow that is not very much liked by our new President. Sooner these people start earning their bread the better for us all. Maybe we will employ him as the head carpenter for the Wall construction and make our dear Mona supervise and nag him to no end.
You probably read the Enquirer and believe it. He is a crooked ass.
I think this is the picture of it?
https://m.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/5mb2o6/you_can_hear_the_muhuhahahahah/
Please ~ Intercept Journalists ~ write an article on what we the people can do. All the children on the planet deserve us to stand up and protect them and the planet ~
And what’s even worse? These neocon assholes just don’t fucking care what anybody else thinks.
Same -same hard left. I listen to both but judge for myself. Both have some good ideas if moderated. Endless executive wars or uncontrolled open borders will destroy the Nation and subvert the Constitution. Yes we need a strong National defense and generous immigration laws but both are now out of control and if unchecked both will damage the Nation and many of its citizens.
Trump may be the ultimate bad example that “stimulates” congressional checks and balance prescribed in the Constitution, about time. Off chance he may do the same thoughtfully or even successfully as he ran his campaign. In either case we have passed beyond PC and must confront the issues we have ignored or postponed too long. We the people must again become the stewards of our future to achieve future frontiers and greatness in a “good-way.” This will involve balancing the three legged stool of governance, business and populace. We can have a better Nation for all citizens of all classes, creeds and races but only if the people unite to achieve this goal. Hard right or hard left cannot compromise to conceive that future.
That seems unpossible that Goldman Sachs who paid Hillary Clinton such big sums of money to speak to them, and were big funders of Pres. Obama’s campaigns, could possibly want to roll back (i.e. gut, eviscerate, delete, repeal) all kinds of environmental and consumer protections that the Obama administration, and presumably a Hillary Clinton administration would have kept.
I mean Goldman Sachs isn’t a multi-tentacle vampire quid sucking the life blood out of America like Taibbi says, they are the “good guys”. I know that because they are so close to both Pres. Obama and the Clintons, and gave huge sums of money to see them lead this nation.
Totally totally unpossible, it must be a misprint [cough, cough].
Not to worry, Trump is draining that swamp. Oh, wait:
Trump fills cabinet with Goldman Sachs ‘villains’
It’s almost as if they’re not on opposing sides at all!
Politicians are whores, all of them! They party with those that they are aligned to, aka receive campaign bribes from.
Ryan is a politician. I hope Trump is not.
Trump used to be one of the regular Johns, and now he’s playing the part of the brothel manager.
As is becoming all too usual, Isaiah seems to have gotten here first: See how the faithful city has become a prostitute! She once was full of justice; righteousness used to dwell in her — but now murderers! Your silver has become dross, your choice wine is diluted with water. Your rulers are rebels, partners with thieves; they all love bribes and chase after gifts. They do not defend the cause of the fatherless; the widow’s case does not come before them… The good news is in that situation he says it will all get put right … the bad news is that it doesn’t sound like much fun: “People will flee to caves in the rocks and to holes in the ground from the fearful presence of the Lord and the splendor of his majesty, when he rises to shake the earth.” etc. Wonder what stock index you can invest in that tracks canned food and shotguns.
Yes, the sky fairy will save us!
We’re fatally screwed here except for the possibility of obstruction in the senate
These are rollbacks than will kill people who are not millionaires.
Off-topic but important. Here’s the latest from our “intelligence agencies” wrt “Russian interference” in the election:
Background to “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions
in Recent US Elections”: The Analytic Process and Cyber
Incident Attribution, et seq. at same URL.
They keep outdoing themselves girls and boys. This is the most content-free, openly propagandistic, laughable-but-scary piece of crap they’ve turned out on this subject, to date.
Apparently, they are committed to rashly pushing confrontation with Russia and declaring war on this country’s president-elect at the same time. Scary may well “trump” laughable in this case.
The report states in virtually the first line:
The Intelligence Community rarely can publicly reveal the full extent of its knowledge or the precise bases for its assessments, as the release of such information would reveal sensitive sources or methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future.
This reality is often ignored or dismissed, yet it is true.
Barton Gellman tweeted as much yesterday:
That’s awfully convenient. Sounds like we’re supposed to have faith, which is childish.
Ha. Ha. Ha.
The Bosses thank you for your unquestioning credulity.
I share your anger and outrage at the fact of US intelligence agencies and, it seems, everyone in industry, the press, and other sectors… has, does and will lie to the public…. often with horrific consequences.
I pointed to the disclaimer because it points to another real challenge in all this:
How does the public, and when does the public get to see the kind of information that would prove beyond a reasonable doubt ? without at the same time, reveal sources, means, and methods?
meant in reply to rrheard.
…and, I wonder, given the falsification of WMD, and other manipulations, have we come to the point that under no circumstances will evidence be accepted…
many are deeply suspicious of Putin’s provocations, Trump’s statements, invitations to hack along, and history of innumerable obligations and conflicts of interest… that the argument about credibility and unimpeachability of witnesses and defendants swings both ways… but moreso to a ‘more likely than not’ verdict against this pair.
In plain English: “You’ll just have to trust us, just like on WMDs in Iraq” . . . . oops of course we were lying, or worse yet wrong (even though we are supposed to be the “intelligence experts” and even though everyone on the ground who said they didn’t exist we called liars or in league with Saddam). Where I have I seen this script before. Anybody that believes anything that comes from the “US Intelligence Agencies” without being able to objectively establish its truth is a sucker, fool, or wants to believe things demonstrable liars tell them.
I don’t trust any human being, and I don’t care about their purported accomplishments or supposed level of patriotism, if they lie under oath under penalty of perjury. And as an institution and individual members of most of the “intelligence agencies” in America have done so, repeatedly, and verifiably.
So I’ll form my own opinions on the actual evidence they present not their fucking self-serving press releases.
Sam Biddle has a new piece up on this. Once again, still absent any evidence (that anything specific was done, let alone who did whatever it was, it if it was done), despite the fact that the latest “report” is another lame-ass nothingburger, Sam “personally believes” that the Russian government “did it.”
Beginning to seem like some staff here have had a Keller-esque “blood on your hands” moment with administration officials.
That. or it’s a cluster-fuck of terribly misguided attempts at showing off this new-fangled “un-objective journalism ” while forgetting that you at least have to support those opinions with more credibility than the secret organization with a completely horrible track record you are agreeing with.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-russia-intel-briefing_us_586ff4cde4b043ad97e35c1c
…..even Trump acknowledges this fact
The Bush administration falsified the report so they justification to do what would pay big money to the private defense hogs like Chaney and black water. Don’t you get it or are you just plain stupid!
U.S. intel communities have been corrupt for decades. This link I leave you has all the proof one would ever need. Warning, it will keep you bogged down for hours at a time. LOL
http://www.wanttoknow.info/mk/liftingtheveil
Aren’t these the same people who told GWB bin Laden likely to attack US? Which was ignored. Aren’t these the same people who Dick Cheney harassed continuously about WMDs? And didn’t Cheney, fellow travelers and even NYT journalists twist and lie about intelligence reports to meet his own foregone conclusions? Much better to trust V Putin and Julian Assange than those guys.
Is this comment on every article? K, we get it, you don’t believe the governmental investigators. Move it along. I fail to see the relativity to this story about a piece of shit…
I’m sure there are many things you fail to see, young man (although you may be forgiven the inability to see relativity — it’s quite difficult to visualize).
Fortunately, that’s not my problem.
The Republicans in Congress have made fools of the people who shouted “Drain the Swamp”.
And by the way, why should Republicans tell the truth when there is no penalty of lying?
Not that this is necessarily off/on topic, but it’s from an insightful professor at Cornell who studies the government of Malaysia.
I think it would be an interesting, and short read, for most around here. It reiterates a point I’ve long made (notwithstanding the meaningful political science distinctions between authoritarian and totalitarian as descriptors for types of government) re: why no one should be confused about how something like Nazi Germany could happen, when seemingly Germans were otherwise, for their time, fairly “enlightened” as a people. Just look in the mirror. It actually isn’t surprising how it happens, only that it is fairly rare and its manifestations “outrageous” when it does happen, which is why so much study is spent on the topic. Lots of human beings tolerate “authoritarian” governments, while many believe they are living in a “democracy”, because they are nominally doing both–it is a question of degree not kind necessarily.
A very common reality living under authoritarianism and/or inverted totalitarianism a term coined by Prof. Wolin.
In any event, thought I’d share:
https://tompepinsky.com/2017/01/06/everyday-authoritarianism-is-boring-and-tolerable/
All the internal links are worth a read too particularly if you aren’t familiar with Hannah Arendt’s or Carl J. Friedrich’s work.
Prof. Corey Robin has written quite a bit about Arendt’s work so if you want some in depth analysis he’s a good source too.
And my point isn’t to argue necessarily that America is a “soft authoritarian” or “inverted totalitarian” experience, again, just that it is a matter of degree, and one’s opinion on whether he/she does or does not so live, is very much a function of their experience living under/within that regime. A person of color, or woman, indigenous North American person or LGBT citizen has over time in America had a much different legal and cultural experience vis a vis their relationship to the government and their fellow citizens (particularly white propertied males) than have others who have lived different experiences or “identities”.
And of course there are many meaningful distinctions between the governments of Malaysia and the US.
If the US state wants a person to live a totalitarian experience he or she will do just that, regardless of how it looks from 50,000 feet above. There are many people who are being subjected to this evil right now, 50,000 feet under your nose.
Evil doesn’t happen because good people do nothing. Evil happens because people are evil.
Like I said, I’m well aware that different people are subject to different experiences and “realities” under the same government.
I’m also fully aware of the meaningful distinctions between the terms authoritarian and totalitarian as a function of political science nomenclature. You should as well before you take the posture of lecturing me about something I’m well aware of and specifically addressed in my comment.
What I get from your verbose and high-flown lecture is that you are aware of some abstract concepts, but have no personal experience on the sharp end. Those of us who do have plenty of that experience have every right to point that out to you.
The Republicans are making a mistake by claiming the election gave them a public mandate by which to enact every conservative wet dream their greedy, little hearts desire.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Their candidate won a race of fear and loathing that was all spectacle and little substance. A race pitting two of the least popular candidates in U.S. history against each other in a disgusting race to the bottom which embarrassed our country, and did an enormous disservice to all Americans and our way of choosing our so-called leaders.
Could the Republican rallying cry of “Drain the swamp!” sound more phony and pathetic after the first simple steps of this Congress have revealved an arrogance and sense of entitlement that puts the Democrats to shame?
Our only hope may be in the overzealous behavior of our new congress, already drunk on power and chomping at the bit to remake America in their own greedy, self-serving image.
But, their overreach is bound to backfire, as good people all over our nation recognize the abusive hypocricy of this new Republican era. We are taking names and are going to hold accountable those responsible for the upcoming Republican assault on our freedoms, health care, public lands and tax dollars.
See you at the voting booth.
SPOT ON. i see that happening. i also think their efforts may produce such a loud backfire as to be heard around the planet. And, not meaning to sound sadistic, it’s going to be hilarious as their feet slide in their mud while falling and doing a face plant in said mud which they attempt to wipe off but only smear more, staring bug-eyed.
I agree. It’s hard to imagine it happening any other way. For awhile, we may have to settle for the entertainment value these clowns are going to provide us.
I get 1:1 paid leave in lieu of overtime thanks to the rollback. So… yeah, I can’t really complain too much about that one.
And you don’t care about others who may not get what you do?
Well, hell, this is America, land of rugged individualism! Get what you can, when you can, and let others take care of themselves.
Excuse me while I puke.
Best government money can buy! The only difference is that it’s getting a lot more blatant.
nothing these whores do is about building American lives out of poverty and into sustained comfort – it’s just about pleasing their masters. Ryan is a peculiar creature, big ego deficit, thinks a lot of himself, pandering to his constituents and speaking out as if he is looking in a mirror, his self image is a fantasy that they need and adore him. Perhaps he is mildly schizophrenic, or maybe it’s OCD, or maybe bipolar. The elected republicans are most stricken with these sort of disorders, not so much the dems. This is to be expected because to qualify for these most important positions, all you have to do is lie better.
I am into sustained comfort myself. It’s good.
i see you see the light
that is also “good”.
And yet they do not take back Congress’s constitutional and legal authority over making war. (Had they done so, Bill Clinton would not have completed his term (Kosovo did not have Congress’s approval) and neither would Obama (Libya failed multiple times).)
They need to take that back as well. I fully agree.
However, McConnell of the Senate and almost everyone else in Congress fully supported Clinton’s bombing of Serbia. In fact, I heard him almost orgasming in front of cameras, explaining how our humanitarian bombing of Serbia would cause the regular Joes there to wake up in a cold room because we bombed their electric gird, with no clean water to drink because we bombed their water purification facilities and no job to go to because we bombed their factories. If there is a Hell, there’s a McConnell processing area set already, I’m sure.
“Elections” have one purpose: To make people believe they have some degree of control.
And what is the purpose, precisely, of saying “elections” have one purpose?
I realize that changing the status quo takes time, money and effort, which I’ve given in the past and am willing to do so going forward.
What I don’t get is folks ignoring the demonstrable fact that not voting gets you whatever the status quo or its pseudo-replacement wants, or worse.
If not voting gets me the change that I want, I’d do it. It simply doesn’t – and it won’t – ever work out that way.
on the other hand, voting for change is sort of a self inflicted wound, believing that your vote contributes for a net plus, which it does not, it’s a net negative since 1967. On the other hand, maybe voting is like putting on the brakes so that the net negative doesnt happen as fast, but if the candydate is a good liar, you could be shooting yourself in the foot. And when you realise you have been fooled and betrayed, you can whip yourself for voting for that person and make up for it by putting out more effort to vote again when simply flipping a coin may work as well which would also mean, not voting gets you the same result except you save yourself the wasted effort.
I agree that not voting isn’t a solution my comment is that once these elected officials reach Washington, the lobbyists take over and whatever were the wishes of voters are secondary or irrelevant.
So vote me out..once I enact their legislation I’ll go work for the companies that contributed to my campaign. Do you actually believe corporations contribute ..because they’re interested in democracy?
Seems like circular reasoning to me, because you’re still saying that not voting will get you the results you want somehow.
Without voting or being elected yourself? How does that work?
No more than you really believe that not voting works, it seems.
Don’t play the sock puppet’s game. Don’t concede anything to it.
Voting for American pols is a self-destructive act of evil, and even worse for The Aliens. This is a “demonstrable”, documented, non-controversial fact. The proof is in the country’s jails (that don’t contain financial industry criminals), and the millions of people who have been bombed, shot, tortured and poisoned by Americans and the things they vote for.
People who voted for Paul Ryan wanted something different than what they are getting, you are telling us?
Voting for American pols documents your complicity.
The more you vote the heavier that nasty sack of garbage hanging from your neck becomes. And the stench! It’s too thick and late for you, Mr. Perry… you’ll never be able to wash that out.
Sillyputty takes offense at Dreadlock’s unwillingness to endorse the corrupt, totalitarian bullshit Sillyputty wants him to endorse every four years. The only demonstrable point this soft-headed guy makes is that he is a fool or paid to be a fool.
No, I don’t. I do question the rational stated, though.
No, I don’t.
Not for the reasons you’ve stated.
Look, if you can’t reasonably state my positions, how in the world can you effectively rebut them?
I look forward to speaking more with you, subject to you choosing to use your own words and positions to state what you think, and not what you pretend are mine or someone else’s.
Emphasis added.
Thanks for that link, Doug. I’m quite familiar with the dynamic described, albeit seen mostly at the local level in the small rural community where I live, and especially when I was a reluctant union representative working for a public agency there.
The scenario has proved to upscale quite well. Or is that trickle-down quite well? Anyway, my view is that it’s ubiquitous and mostly a result of preexisting conditions in place for quite some time.
My experience is that a majority of people just want to get things done, and that because of the paradigm that prevail, they find themselves expending all of their physical and emotional resources simply existing.
They are stuck with dealing day-to-day with providing or securing for themselves and/or their family just the basics of food, shelter, an adequate education, and health care, among other things that humans need regularly to stay alive and remain emotionally healthy. Also needing consideration is the fact that not all of these folks are putting all these endeavors into practice as well as the ideologically stunted Ayn Rand zealots would like them to. (Nor or the zealots actually, I know quite a few of those hypocrites). It’s largely “help them!” or “isolate them!” depending on which credo you adhere to.
This is largely what leads to a verification of the observation being made in the highlighted text: that “average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence” in directing policy changes at the local, state or national level. They don’t have the time, or resources to do so effectively.
Change takes a lot of consistent, hard work, and even if most of that majority mentioned above had the time, it’s my experience that for it to change for the better the only solution – the only one – that I’ve seen that works under the conditions described I’ve described is to vote in/hire people that have demonstrated over their life or career that they have already advocated for progressive change.
That, or, like rrheard, I’m afraid it’ll be left to a large scale, disruptive and likely very violent revolution, and the consequences if that happens aren’t something I look forward to.
This is why Bernie’s ouster was such a suck-ass thing: he’s one of the few national politicians I’ve seen that walks the walk, day-in and day out.
Attempting to convince the Democrats during the primaries (and even still) that a peaceful, honest and above-board transition of power didn’t work out, and I’m pretty much at a loss as to what to do about that.
Edit: Nor *are the zealots
On domestic policy he is laudable, but Bernie is a total suck-ass himself when it comes to foreign policy and the military-industrial complex, a huge boondoggle of corruption he has made no attempt to promote drastically reducing – even though such could finance many socialist causes without even raising taxes.
For the most part, I agree. That said, taking care of folks at home first, which I feel he had the backing of enough of us to do had he won, with legitimate programs that will immediately make their lives better goes a long way to reducing the stressors that lead to violence and strained relations in the first place.
Knowing you’re basically secure in your home and health makes lashing out at your neighbors much less appealing.
One thing Bernie seems good at is actually listening and following the will of his constituency; and again, I think had he won, there’d be enough push-back to lead us all in a much more peaceful direction.
That’s a fair point as far as it goes, but if he wants to appeal to all peaceful progressives (and, as a probably-needed bonus, all libertarians – who hold the non-aggression principle very highly), he’s going to have to go that extra step and denounce the military-industrial complex in no uncertain terms.
This is a very stark publication indeed. It is based on data from 1981 and 2002, and the multivariate analysis works out as follows: average citizens (50% income percentile) 0.05, economic elites 0.78, mass-based interest groups 0.24, business interest groups 0.43. So policy changes are attributed mostly to the wealthy, with business interest groups as a runner up, with some minor tampering by organized political organizations and virtually no impact of simple polls of ordinary people. To be sure, the majority was getting the policy changes it wanted “most” of the time (61%), but only because the top 10% was getting what it wanted 81% of the time, and they tended to agree.
Of course, this study doesn’t address that the top income brackets have often been persuaded to change their minds based on a few individual actions made outside the normal political process…
Actually, they’re to make the Russians believe they have some degree of control. The entire process may seem overly elaborate as a ruse on the Russians, but it is a useful government make work project as the deep state has a lot of free time on its hands.
Ha ha!
in nature, bull rushes, stampedes, swarms, flocks, and schools… overwhelm predators with massive movements that confuse and distract….
TRiUMPhant Republicans will flood Congress with an array of cabinet appointments for review, proposals, and legislation. By design, it will overwhelm the public… one or two items may be picked off… but the tactic works in politics as in nature… to ensure an enormous number will survive.
Power corrupts. Historically proven.
It’s called the Republican ‘Party’ for a reason. Hopefully they invited someone from the Office of Congressional Ethics to help them celebrate.
So the complaint is that the US Congress, made up of elected guys and gals – yes, I know that they all work for Israel but they are elected nevertheless – decides to take back powers that unelected bureaucrats grabbed to themselves.
And that’s wrong or terrible because… Should we allow the faceless bureaucrats to tell us what to do and how to do it no matter what it is that we are doing and punish us if we don’t do it the way they command?
Reading comprehension: it’s fundamental.
Should it be regulated by some agency? Should the Congress be able to repeal that regulation?
Um actually, Congress “delegates” its “authority” to executive branch departments, agencies and their appointed and career civil service “bureaucrats”, and empowers them through the “rule-making process” and enforcement mechanisms to carry out their Congressionally delegated and statutory mandates.
The “bureaucrats,” except possibly the US “intelligence agencies,” don’t “grab powers to themselves” nor with that exception do they generally do it “facelessly”.
Civics 101 is good for you.
Aha, let me see if I comprehended this correctly:
1 – the regulatory bodies’ powers ARE delegated to them by Congress
2 – whatever powers the Congress delegates to such bodies, the Congress may take back at any time
3 – it’s therefore Okay for Congress to repeal regulations that such bodies issue if the Congress, through a vote by elected representatives. In fact, I would like the Congress to evaluate all such regulations and repeal everything deemed to be an abuse or overreach or simply ‘coo-coo’.
4 – there are instances when the ‘agencies’ overreach and claim to have powers that the Congress did not specifically delegate so I would expect that the Congress rubs their virtual noses into the mess that they created when the Congress catches them doing so.
So, exactly what’s wrong or nefarious or terrible about the US Congress reassessing their right to oversee and when necessary reverse or correct the bureaucracies?
This is synonymous to a warden ‘reassessing’ the needs for bars and guards in a prison. If you can’t see that Congress has just let all the criminals out to continue committing their crimes against our air, drinking water, children, etc…..then you are beyond help.
I am sorry but you are completely wrong.
Whether you like it or not, the US Congress is made up of ELECTED representative. Elected by THE PEOPLE, that is. You may not like WHO gets elected or HOW they get elected but that’s a different story.
The bureaucrats issuing thousands of pages of new regulations are not elected and they HAVE to be kept in check. To go to your example is like the prison administration sending the warden out to manage the prison and never-ever again check what the warden is doing.
As I said, if you can’t understand the difference between right and wrong, you’re beyond help.
So, I assume you think it was okay for Nazi Germany to create the laws they did to execute millions of people, right? That’s what you are arguing for.
You are arguing that no matter what law is passed, it’s morally fair. That’s a pretty ignorant position to take.
If these laws were put to the test, believe me, your masters who pollute our water would be upset because people do like clean water, clean air, education for their kids.
You arguing in this fashion is another prime ignorant position of FORM over SUBSTANCE. You believe that the very form of our political process and the fact that they laws were properly repealed by elected officials is morally fair and just.
When in fact, you ignore the substance of what they are doing which is making our environment unsafe, drinking water polluted and building an ignorant, uneducated underclass.
You need to look underneath the overt action and understand the underlying truth about what is happening. Don’t be a patsy for those who would take away any or all of your rights to satisfy their quarterly income statement.
Wrong. The people voted for Clinton. The electoral college voted for Trump.
there is a larger picture that others are not factoring in which is the context of an even larger picture – FOREIGN POLICY. It has been decided by the elite establishment that the world works for them and that the US is just another country and should be subject to the dictates of the foreign policy club. In that context, American citizens are only voters and otherwise worthless except to fight wars for the foreign policy dictators.
The REASON for the daily security briefing for the pres is to horse whip him into more or less bowing to the needs of “foreign” policy and Americans be damned.
Foreign policy is the incubator for the TPP and as long as foreign policy is in the driver’s seat, American citizens are TOAST.
“regulations” are not what is colloquially understood as straight jacket straps. Regulations – a really bad term – are actually PROTECTIONS. They are things a company must not do or must file to assure compliance that they have not poisoned the water supply, air, or robbed people. They dont work however because in the eyes of other whores, no prosecutor would ever take the case or, no prosecutor cold ever win the case. So in that sense, regulations are a burden because violating them is just an extra cost of doing business as usual, poisoning the air and water and robbing people.
Calling regulations ‘protections’ sounds somewhat Orwellian to me, I don’t know why.
Anyways, it is the Congress’ responsibility to check back and see to what degree those ‘protections’ are needed or whether they aren’t in fact annoying or possibly harming the citizens. We elected the Congress and the Congress should represent our will so when we decide, for example, that we’d rather have lower taxes at the expense of fewer aircraft carrier groups, then the Congress needs to listen and act.
My hope and expectation is that the Congress fully exercise its powers and stop allowing some coo-coo presidents rule by executive order the way they allowed Clinton, Bush and Obama, take responsibility for declaring wars, especially wars of aggression and generally be a true LEGISLATIVE branch, representing the citizens of this country.
So, just in case there’s a misunderstanding, I absolutely welcome Congress’ decision to review regulations and repeal those that harm the people. At the same time, I am skeptical that they are going to do this in a thorough and serious fashion. They are likely to try to repeal regulations and executive orders issued under the Dems and leave W’s untouched. But… we shall see.
Not to be too nit-picky, but just somewhat nit-picky, it depends on how you evaluate harm and who congress listens to because they rarely listen to people, the people. A repuber congress will repeal anything that dems did if such repeal financially benefits their masters.
Here is what i think you are trying to put across – congress needs to repeal big expenses like military budgets to finance wars that harm lots of people?
As representatives of THE PEOPLE, the Congress is ENTITLED and EXPECTED to review and revise all laws and regulations, as needed. Their decision to actually do so rather than spend their time renaming post offices should be applauded, not criticized.
Bureaucracies run amok are to be feared more than a Congress that doesn’t truly speak for the people because ‘we’ have the power to elect and NOT re-elect our representatives if they don’t represent us properly. If we do not exercise the power and keep re-electing corrupt people at all levels – remember we RE-elected Clinton, Bush and Obama – than we get what we deserve and the shame should be on us. We, collectively speaking, may be stupid and complacent but we are NOT victims.
I don’t have any problem with Congress taking back authority once delegated to any agency.
It was your framing that it is the “bureaucrats that grab it for themselves” which I found to be inaccurate. And most of those “bureacrats” unlike elected officials, or their appointees, are simply career civil servants who just carry out their mandated duties as they are instructed by the politically appointed bureaucrats.
As far as “overreach” goes, yes it happens. But it happens because of the iron law of institutions and because Congress, for political reasons (and simply practical ones) doesn’t have time to contemplate each and every possible factual permutation so as to draft laws that are incredibly precise. They leave the interpretation and administration of their laws to those they delegate the rulemaking and enforcement processes to, and the courts when there is conflict.
I’m perfectly fine with Congress doing its job and overseeing those they’ve delegated authority to in the Executive Branch.
Again, it was your framing I was taking issue with because I found it misleading/inaccurate.
Nouveau right-wingers who found common cause with TI over various Anti-war and Anti-Hillary sentiments are now shocked that TI is not a libertarian outlet.
Paul Ryan’s idol is one of the most famous hypocritical thinkers of the past 100 years, Ayn Rand. The man openly supports unmitigated greed and believes he’s entitled to anything he’s able to take. Of course he’s going to throw a party when they get a win.
It always blew me away they made us read Rand’s idiotic drivel in school. Why have high schoolers read the delusional rants of someone who touted personal responsibility and achievement while living off of public institutions, like the supposed leeches she hated.
I really wish people like him would truly live up to their ideals. Use all that money to build your own roads, your own plumbing, your own food, and your own Internet, if that’s what you truly believe in. But no, their philosophy has always been, “If I can make you do it and take credit for your work, then I will.”
I always love a chance to roll out John Rogers’ wonderful quote:
Just was curious where you were that they had you read Ayn Rand?
It’s a shame. The big problem is where people take something like The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged as non-fiction.
Paul Ryan related: I’ve always been blown away by people who will lie about the smallest things, when there’s no reason, nothing to gain. Psychologically, why does someone do this? So, it was extremely notable to me that Ryan blatantly lied about his (one and only) Marathon time, not by a minute, or ten, but by over a full hour. It’s insane; something you do not “mis-remember.” On (or beyond) the level of Hillary Clinton landing under sniper fire.
These people we seem to have at the highest reins of government are narcissistic power-hungry Creeps. But, I suppose one begets the other.
I went to a high school in northern California. It was a predominantly white neighborhood.
It’s funny, we were assigned Rand’s book as one of the required readings, I wanna say it was junior or senior year. It’s been a while. For a later book project we had a choice between reading 1984 or Catch-22. Kind of a twisted irony I didn’t see until later in my life. I chose Catch-22 and loved it. I read 1984 later in life and loved it too.
The Ryans and Rands of the World are real good talkers but milk the system for all they can grab for themselves and other takers not makers. If Trump lets Ryan run his Rand all for me and to hell with you agenda Trump will lose support fast. In a real winner take all world the Ryans and Rands would not last long. That would be one of the only good things in such a world.
Having recently robbed the native Americans and struggling with feature films of cowboys and settlers vs the indians, she had enough illogic to present a feel-good rationale to the population so they could finally abandon the “kill the injuns” movies and get on with life in a fashion that made stealing an evolutionary inevitability (see eminent or imminent domain). You see how well wallstreet picked up on that. Israel is a work in progress also for the self righteous. For them Ayn is not their backstop, it’s an ancient grant deed from god himself.