4 ms·

This represents the fundamental legal struggle that should have been solved in the Carter years. Out of control government agencies cannot change the country by

This represents the fundamental legal struggle that should have been solved in the Carter years. Out of control government agencies cannot change the country by issuing “rules” decided on by non elected officials. Congress needs to act for many of these items. We need to give the current speaker a lot of credit, not for his content, which is controversial at best. But for splitting up bills and trying to get back to “regular order” instead of wasting the year and then jamming through a frantic and gigantic “omnibus” bill at the 11 and a half’th hour. I don’t care which side of the political spectrum you’re on, the bush patriot act was wrong, bill clinton’s omni bus actions were wrong and trumps presidential actions were overreaching and were wrong. Governing by instructing your appointed federal agency leaders is the same garbage. This literally is the swamp they talk about. Congress needs to spend a lot more time exercising regular order. I encourage everyone to tell your congress-person this, the next time they ask for your vote or donation. “Congress is broken” so fix it, don’t just say congress is broken and then embrace socialism and tyranny!! The same centralization of power happened in Canada with the PMO’s office under Harper and then massively expanded again under the Trudeau liberals who expanded the size and role of the federal government in breathtaking ways.

cyanydeez 2y ago
Congress has be made to be beholded to the very people who want the administrative state to be impotent. Congrats on being that guy who believes it's just a series of tubes.
squigz 2y ago
> don’t just say congress is broken and then embrace socialism and tyranny!! This escalated quickly. How does socialism arise from what you're describing?
- tcmart14 2y ago
  It doesn't. It just a case of perceived socialism is when capitalist governments 'do bad things' (aka things I don't like).
1shooner 2y ago
I think that the people benefit from more expert regulation than congress or appointed judges can provide. I don't think a car dealership owner or a politically well-positioned lawyer should be the final say what is and isn't allowed in my drinking water.
- tacitusarc 2y ago
  Surely this is a balancing act, though. Federal regulatory agencies are such a revolving door that their expertise is a punchline and regulatory capture is now a mainstream concept. One lens is that noon competes are bad and abusive, so this ruling is bad. And I get that, because I agree fundamentally with the premise. But another lens is that there are systemic issues at play, and allowing a federal agency to unilaterally restrict which types of contracts individuals can enter which express power to do so may have unforeseen consequences. I guess I’d like to know what the rule is. What kinds of contracts could be restricted? Which ones would not be? Maybe Congress could pass a law stating no contract may restrict employment opportunities after the relationship is terminated, or something to that effect.
elteto 2y ago
> Don’t just say congress is broken and then embrace socialism and tyranny!! Ah yes, the FTC protecting workers is one more step on the way to tyranny and socialism! Funny, it’s always socialism when you guys don’t like something. We are only closer to tyranny _because_ of Trump and the proto-fascists in the GOP. And Congress is broken _because_ of the same fundamentalists who refuse to actually govern this country. People like you are the reason this country is where it’s at.
- redeeman 2y ago
  yeah, the country went to hell in a handbasket just as the orange man came into play, was a shining example of greatness just a few moments before him. The reason the country is where its at is because of hyperpartisanship like what you exhibit here. Other side bad, my side good. Hate to break it to you, but you are a pawn, NONE of these parties cares even the slightest bit about you, and if it would enrich them even 1 dollar they would kill you and your entire family in an instant. AND throw poison on your grave so now flowers could ever grow there.
jjk166 2y ago
Governing by instructing your appointed federal agency leaders is the optimal way to govern. It would be absurd for congress to micromanage everything - the world is too complicated for 535 people to even consider every rule a modern functioning country needs, nonetheless develop the deep understanding of the topics necessary to make a good decision. Good leaders delegate. Congress has been doing so since the 1800s, and the American people, by democratic election, have approved of this course of action the whole time. We want a functional government. Congress empowers these agencies, it defines the scope of the powers it delegates, it approves the appointment of high ranking individuals to these agencies, it can hold both individuals and agencies accountable, and it ultimately control the funding all these agencies need - the will of an agency is the will of congress.
- willcipriano 2y ago
  > It would be absurd for congress to micromanage everything Then don't and let the states do it.
  - nobody9999 2y ago
    >Then don't and let the states do it. Yep. So you believe that the states should print their own currency, set and collect taxes for the federal government, have their own military forces instead of a centralized military, set their own pollution standards, approve/ban drugs/medical equipment (pharmaceuticals, OTC, etc.), grant patents and trademarks and all manner of other stuff, right? How, exactly, would that work? Edit: Clarified my prose.
    - willcipriano 2y ago
      Some of those are duties of the federal government as outlined in the constitution. They would do those and nothing else as intended originally. I don't think you should be able to own ideas. I don't think you should be able to ban drugs/medical equipment. If you want that, move to a state that limits your freedom in that way.

cyanydeez 2y ago

Congress has be made to be beholded to the very people who want the administrative state to be impotent. Congrats on being that guy who believes it's just a series of tubes.

squigz 2y ago

> don’t just say congress is broken and then embrace socialism and tyranny!! This escalated quickly. How does socialism arise from what you're describing?

tcmart14 2y ago
It doesn't. It just a case of perceived socialism is when capitalist governments 'do bad things' (aka things I don't like).

1shooner 2y ago

I think that the people benefit from more expert regulation than congress or appointed judges can provide. I don't think a car dealership owner or a politically well-positioned lawyer should be the final say what is and isn't allowed in my drinking water.

tacitusarc 2y ago
Surely this is a balancing act, though. Federal regulatory agencies are such a revolving door that their expertise is a punchline and regulatory capture is now a mainstream concept. One lens is that noon competes are bad and abusive, so this ruling is bad. And I get that, because I agree fundamentally with the premise. But another lens is that there are systemic issues at play, and allowing a federal agency to unilaterally restrict which types of contracts individuals can enter which express power to do so may have unforeseen consequences. I guess I’d like to know what the rule is. What kinds of contracts could be restricted? Which ones would not be? Maybe Congress could pass a law stating no contract may restrict employment opportunities after the relationship is terminated, or something to that effect.

elteto 2y ago

> Don’t just say congress is broken and then embrace socialism and tyranny!! Ah yes, the FTC protecting workers is one more step on the way to tyranny and socialism! Funny, it’s always socialism when you guys don’t like something. We are only closer to tyranny _because_ of Trump and the proto-fascists in the GOP. And Congress is broken _because_ of the same fundamentalists who refuse to actually govern this country. People like you are the reason this country is where it’s at.

redeeman 2y ago
yeah, the country went to hell in a handbasket just as the orange man came into play, was a shining example of greatness just a few moments before him. The reason the country is where its at is because of hyperpartisanship like what you exhibit here. Other side bad, my side good. Hate to break it to you, but you are a pawn, NONE of these parties cares even the slightest bit about you, and if it would enrich them even 1 dollar they would kill you and your entire family in an instant. AND throw poison on your grave so now flowers could ever grow there.

jjk166 2y ago

Governing by instructing your appointed federal agency leaders is the optimal way to govern. It would be absurd for congress to micromanage everything - the world is too complicated for 535 people to even consider every rule a modern functioning country needs, nonetheless develop the deep understanding of the topics necessary to make a good decision. Good leaders delegate. Congress has been doing so since the 1800s, and the American people, by democratic election, have approved of this course of action the whole time. We want a functional government. Congress empowers these agencies, it defines the scope of the powers it delegates, it approves the appointment of high ranking individuals to these agencies, it can hold both individuals and agencies accountable, and it ultimately control the funding all these agencies need - the will of an agency is the will of congress.

willcipriano 2y ago
> It would be absurd for congress to micromanage everything Then don't and let the states do it.
- nobody9999 2y ago
  >Then don't and let the states do it. Yep. So you believe that the states should print their own currency, set and collect taxes for the federal government, have their own military forces instead of a centralized military, set their own pollution standards, approve/ban drugs/medical equipment (pharmaceuticals, OTC, etc.), grant patents and trademarks and all manner of other stuff, right? How, exactly, would that work? Edit: Clarified my prose.
  - willcipriano 2y ago
    Some of those are duties of the federal government as outlined in the constitution. They would do those and nothing else as intended originally. I don't think you should be able to own ideas. I don't think you should be able to ban drugs/medical equipment. If you want that, move to a state that limits your freedom in that way.