> You're assuming the 'total reliance' argument and corresponding actions are being done in good faith. To clarify, I’m not assuming the administration is acti

> You're assuming the 'total reliance' argument and corresponding actions are being done in good faith. To clarify, I’m not assuming the administration is acting in good faith. But in casual conversation, I try to assume the person who worries about total reliance is acting in good faith, so my reply was primarily directed at the comment itself which I have to assume comes from someone who may believe the administration is actually attempting to address the issue. I think there are numerous ways to split this: - The reliance concern as a standalone consideration - How the current administration sees/uses this concern - How the public perceives this concern - How the current administration claims they’re addressing it - Whatever the current administration’s true goals are