4 ms·
Definitely agree it's a good thing - my libertarian core can't help but wonder if the white house has (or ought to have) the power to unilaterally declare this,
by commandlinefan 4y ago
Definitely agree it's a good thing - my libertarian core can't help but wonder if the white house has (or ought to have) the power to unilaterally declare this, though. Would much prefer this had been voted on by congress.
- twblalock 4y agoIt's policy guidance issued by the executive branch to the Federal agencies, which is well within the President's authority. Of course, that also means that another president could reverse this policy just as easily. If Congress passed a law it would be harder to reverse.
- pdonis 4y ago> that also means that another president could reverse this policy just as easily Which, since the deadline for full implementation is December 2025, is not at all a farfetched possibility.
- dimator 4y agoi wonder why this is not a law already? at first i assumed lobbying, but i can't imagine the journal racket to be that lucrative to influence the required number of legislators to block the law, unlike oil or insurance. this seems like such a no-brainer issue, but i would love to hear the spin.
- pksebben 4y agoI'm sure there's a ton of special interests who wouldn't want all the research made public. the oil industry immediately comes to mind. so does tobacco, gambling, pharma, and farming.