5 ms·

While I dislike poorly written laws (including those that work around some failing of our current "state" of government) and judges lacking accountability - thi

While I dislike poorly written laws (including those that work around some failing of our current "state" of government) and judges lacking accountability - this seems to be in the same league as the EPA Regulator Case[0] that's sitting at the Supreme Court right now. The end-goal doesn't appear to be justice for the aggrieved party but more so the elimination of agency-issued oversight. The jurisprudence seems to follow the idea that if the legislator didn't explicitly grant or disallow an agency to do something or regulate something then that agency has absolutely no power at all to do it. On a basic level this seems to make sense but the practical application of this would mean that legislators would need to explicitly pass legislation anytime a regulatory body needs to address a specific issue or regulate some behavior (that presumably they already had the authority to regulate by the very nature of the agency being created). This _may_ be a regular case that naturally found its way into the legal system - but the 5th circuit has the history that it does and the targets of these lawsuits (SEC, EPA, etc) typically have deep-pocketed foes. [0] https://www.npr.org/2022/02/28/1082934438/supreme-court-to-hear-a-case-that-could-limit-the-epas-power-to-fight-climate-ch https://www.npr.org/2022/02/28/1082934438/supreme-court-to-h...

xyzzyz 4y ago
> On a basic level this seems to make sense but the practical application of this would mean that legislators would need to explicitly pass legislation anytime a regulatory body needs to address a specific issue or regulate some behavior Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats, so that they have more time to spend on fundraising and campaigning? This will literally grind US into halt, and bring it to similar stagnation and stasis it was under before FDR.
- vkou 4y ago
  > Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats 1. Those bureaucrats are appointed by the President, whom you vote for, and by Congress, whom you vote for, and may be fired by the former. If you don't like what the executive branch of the government looks like, I have great news for you - you elect your chief executive! And people you elect appoint his immediate underlings! 2. In 2022, I wouldn't hold my breath for congress to pass any laws. Half of congress governs under the explicit mandate that the people paying for their campaign should be above any law, and the other half governs under an implicit mandate to the same effect.
  - remarkEon 4y ago
    Your first point is a little misleading. There's a portion of the administrative state that is filled via executive appointment, yes, however the vast majority are not. There's several hundred thousand semi-permanent positions that are held by career civil servants.
  - xyzzyz 4y ago
    > Those bureaucrats are appointed by the President, whom you vote for, and by Congress, whom you vote for, and may be fired by the former. I wish this was the case, but it is not: only a minuscule fraction of government bureaucrats is politically appointed. The people actually drafting the million pages of administrative regulations are overwhelmingly career bureaucrats, who are effectively unfireable. > 2. In 2022, I wouldn't hold my breath for congress to pass any laws The Congress does pass some laws, for things it cares about and where there is a broad agreement as to what the law should be. If the elected representative cannot get enough votes to pass a law, it most likely means that the law is not that important, or that there is no agreement on what it should be.
    - vkou 4y ago
      > The people actually drafting the million pages of administrative regulations are overwhelmingly career bureaucrats, who are effectively unfireable. They report to the appointed heads of these agencies, who both sign off on their work, and have the power to either fire them, or reassign them, when they refuse to draft the regulations they are told to draft. The reason they don't tend to get fired, is because they tend to do what they are told.
    - sofixa 4y ago
      > If the elected representative cannot get enough votes to pass a law, it most likely means that the law is not that important, or that there is no agreement on what it should be. I'm not even in the US and i know that's quite simply untrue. Almost every single issue gets split among party lines, regardless of its merits. Abortions, vaccinations, climate change combatting are supported by the majority of the population, yet no law on either can really be passed due to arcane rules and the refusal of one party to do anything that might benefit the other ( which is more interested in appearing right and not rocking the boat than actually doing anything). You people need a revolution ( of the head chopping kind, or at least prison/exile) and a complete overhaul of your broken political system. There's no excuse to stick with the first past the post system, gerrymandered districts, voter disenfranchisement, electoral college and the pure temerity around it ( a candidate gets 5k votes more than the other in a state? All electoral votes from that state go to them! ?????) besides the "sanctity" of the current status quo your current political establishment espouses.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- _moof 4y ago
  > Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats As someone subject to a significant body of federal regulation on a technical subject, I would absolutely prefer to have those rules in the hands of the level-headed experts who currently control them rather than a bunch of loud-mouthed politicians - politicians who would still have to gun for votes every N years, and wouldn't bat an eye at doing so by turning technical rules they don't understand into culture war fodder. No thanks.

xyzzyz 4y ago

> On a basic level this seems to make sense but the practical application of this would mean that legislators would need to explicitly pass legislation anytime a regulatory body needs to address a specific issue or regulate some behavior Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats, so that they have more time to spend on fundraising and campaigning? This will literally grind US into halt, and bring it to similar stagnation and stasis it was under before FDR.

vkou 4y ago
> Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats 1. Those bureaucrats are appointed by the President, whom you vote for, and by Congress, whom you vote for, and may be fired by the former. If you don't like what the executive branch of the government looks like, I have great news for you - you elect your chief executive! And people you elect appoint his immediate underlings! 2. In 2022, I wouldn't hold my breath for congress to pass any laws. Half of congress governs under the explicit mandate that the people paying for their campaign should be above any law, and the other half governs under an implicit mandate to the same effect.
- remarkEon 4y ago
  Your first point is a little misleading. There's a portion of the administrative state that is filled via executive appointment, yes, however the vast majority are not. There's several hundred thousand semi-permanent positions that are held by career civil servants.
- xyzzyz 4y ago
  > Those bureaucrats are appointed by the President, whom you vote for, and by Congress, whom you vote for, and may be fired by the former. I wish this was the case, but it is not: only a minuscule fraction of government bureaucrats is politically appointed. The people actually drafting the million pages of administrative regulations are overwhelmingly career bureaucrats, who are effectively unfireable. > 2. In 2022, I wouldn't hold my breath for congress to pass any laws The Congress does pass some laws, for things it cares about and where there is a broad agreement as to what the law should be. If the elected representative cannot get enough votes to pass a law, it most likely means that the law is not that important, or that there is no agreement on what it should be.
  - vkou 4y ago
    > The people actually drafting the million pages of administrative regulations are overwhelmingly career bureaucrats, who are effectively unfireable. They report to the appointed heads of these agencies, who both sign off on their work, and have the power to either fire them, or reassign them, when they refuse to draft the regulations they are told to draft. The reason they don't tend to get fired, is because they tend to do what they are told.
  - sofixa 4y ago
    > If the elected representative cannot get enough votes to pass a law, it most likely means that the law is not that important, or that there is no agreement on what it should be. I'm not even in the US and i know that's quite simply untrue. Almost every single issue gets split among party lines, regardless of its merits. Abortions, vaccinations, climate change combatting are supported by the majority of the population, yet no law on either can really be passed due to arcane rules and the refusal of one party to do anything that might benefit the other ( which is more interested in appearing right and not rocking the boat than actually doing anything). You people need a revolution ( of the head chopping kind, or at least prison/exile) and a complete overhaul of your broken political system. There's no excuse to stick with the first past the post system, gerrymandered districts, voter disenfranchisement, electoral college and the pure temerity around it ( a candidate gets 5k votes more than the other in a state? All electoral votes from that state go to them! ?????) besides the "sanctity" of the current status quo your current political establishment espouses.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
_moof 4y ago
> Yeah, can you imagine the horror of making the congressmen actually do their job and pass the laws, instead of delegating all their authority to unelected, nameless, and effectively unaccountable bureaucrats As someone subject to a significant body of federal regulation on a technical subject, I would absolutely prefer to have those rules in the hands of the level-headed experts who currently control them rather than a bunch of loud-mouthed politicians - politicians who would still have to gun for votes every N years, and wouldn't bat an eye at doing so by turning technical rules they don't understand into culture war fodder. No thanks.