3 ms·

> So agencies will not have any power to actually regulate. This is the goal. Want to pollute? You will soon when the EPA has no teeth.

TeeMassive 2y ago
This could go the other way. All agencies answer to the President. The President could just scrap all regulations or just not enforce them.
- intended 2y ago
  OH! I remember what this sounds like! This sounds like Brexit! People I spoke to said “it could go the other way”. Not only was it an impossibility, it was a prayer that the entire country could get lucky. To which I raise you the 2008 crisis and the defanging of the SEC. Since it looks like people want to neuter weather agencies, I believe its going to be a fascinating couple of years.
  - TeeMassive 2y ago
    I don't think having some sort of philosopher kings bureaucrats is better just because you disagree with some democratic choices
    - intended 2y ago
      Of course. The philosopher king bureaucrats are terrible. I dont know of which ones we are talking about. But See how well Brexit is going! Plus 2008 was an amazing year. Also, looking to make good policy is easy.
      - TeeMassive 2y ago
        Just saying "but Brexit" is a non-sequiture
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > All agencies answer to the President Not independent agencies [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_Un...
  - TeeMassive 2y ago
    "Generally, the heads of independent regulatory agencies can only be removed for cause, but Cabinet members and heads of independent executive agencies, such as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, serve "at the pleasure of the president" and can be removed without cause."
edmundsauto 2y ago
Do you think states will be able to enforce their own pollution restrictions? If so, life in blue states will get comparatively better - I say this as someone who remembers the awful Los Angeles pollution effects of the 1980s.
- Karrot_Kream 2y ago
  This is where things can get very complicated. CARB in California, the body that governs emissions, is only possible because the Clean Air Act gives California a specific waiver to enforce stricter emissions standards than the EPA. Is this overreach by the EPA, and if so, can CARB even continue to exist in California? EDIT: It seems to me like it'll be business as usual for CARB but there's significant uncertainty here. The Supremacy Clause forbids the states from overwriting federal law, but if the EPA loses its enforcement powers altogether then nothing stops California from continuing to exert more stringent emissions standards. However it'll create a lot of uncertainty for automakers if the EPA and CARB is challenged on the grounds of regulating emissions and I'm not looking forward to what would happen next.

TeeMassive 2y ago

This could go the other way. All agencies answer to the President. The President could just scrap all regulations or just not enforce them.

intended 2y ago
OH! I remember what this sounds like! This sounds like Brexit! People I spoke to said “it could go the other way”. Not only was it an impossibility, it was a prayer that the entire country could get lucky. To which I raise you the 2008 crisis and the defanging of the SEC. Since it looks like people want to neuter weather agencies, I believe its going to be a fascinating couple of years.
- TeeMassive 2y ago
  I don't think having some sort of philosopher kings bureaucrats is better just because you disagree with some democratic choices
  - intended 2y ago
    Of course. The philosopher king bureaucrats are terrible. I dont know of which ones we are talking about. But See how well Brexit is going! Plus 2008 was an amazing year. Also, looking to make good policy is easy.
    - TeeMassive 2y ago
      Just saying "but Brexit" is a non-sequiture
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> All agencies answer to the President Not independent agencies [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_Un...
- TeeMassive 2y ago
  "Generally, the heads of independent regulatory agencies can only be removed for cause, but Cabinet members and heads of independent executive agencies, such as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, serve "at the pleasure of the president" and can be removed without cause."

edmundsauto 2y ago

Do you think states will be able to enforce their own pollution restrictions? If so, life in blue states will get comparatively better - I say this as someone who remembers the awful Los Angeles pollution effects of the 1980s.

Karrot_Kream 2y ago
This is where things can get very complicated. CARB in California, the body that governs emissions, is only possible because the Clean Air Act gives California a specific waiver to enforce stricter emissions standards than the EPA. Is this overreach by the EPA, and if so, can CARB even continue to exist in California? EDIT: It seems to me like it'll be business as usual for CARB but there's significant uncertainty here. The Supremacy Clause forbids the states from overwriting federal law, but if the EPA loses its enforcement powers altogether then nothing stops California from continuing to exert more stringent emissions standards. However it'll create a lot of uncertainty for automakers if the EPA and CARB is challenged on the grounds of regulating emissions and I'm not looking forward to what would happen next.