vxbush 11/13/2024 5:30:07 AM

1

Buzz wrote late yesterday: 

Election boards only have to be "on deck" with working voting machines, clean voting rolls, etc., every two years or so. Yet there are always "difficulties" with the vote count, "voting machines that are down," and "questions" about the accuracy of the voter rolls.
They have one job. They have, quite literally, years to prepare for "opening night" when their work is essential. And I cannot remember an election cycle in the last 20 years where they did not fail to perform their essential function.

Which party has most often been involved in these issues? Is it evenly split between Democrats and Republicans? I'm asking honestly, because it sure seems like all the areas that were having issues this past election were Democrat strongholds. 

vxbush 11/13/2024 5:38:41 AM

2

Some conservatives seem to be super-excited about Elon Must and Vivek Ramaswamy heading up a new Department of Government Efficiency. My first response is it's a contradiction; "government" and "efficiency" really don't go together. 

While I will assume these two honestly want to improve the situation--and Musk has proven his administrative bona fides in industry--I'm really unsure how they can make progress when systems don't get upgraded for decades and institutional inertia has solidified into a ice-cold pile of adamantium. 

Thoughts? Better opinions? Please, post.

vxbush 11/13/2024 5:41:27 AM

3

vxbush 11/13/2024 5:43:00 AM

4

vxbush 11/13/2024 5:46:40 AM

5

I heard about this late yesterday, but this is huge: 

The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit summarily vaporized 46 years of Federal environmental regulations. Writing in a case called Marin Audubon Society, et al v. FAA, et al, the majority of a three-judge panel ruled that the Council on Environmental Quality, a cabal inside the Executive Office of the President charged with ensuring that National Environmental Protection Act requirements are interpreted uniformly across the federal government, had illegally used the Federal Register to publish that guidance thereby giving citizens, agencies, and even the courts the impression that their internal guidance had the authority of law.

The decision was written by Karen LeCraft Henderson (George H. W. Bush) and A. Raymond Randolph (George H. W. Bush) with Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan (Joe Biden) dissenting, and it found:

As the parties argue the case, it centers on whether the Agencies complied with regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality, an entity within the Executive Office of the President.  We will not address these arguments.  The CEQ regulations, which purport to govern how all federal agencies must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, are ultra vires. 

Ultra vires means the CEQ was acting "beyond the legal scope of it authority."

I'm guessing it will head to the Supreme Court, but I don't know if they would take this case up or not. It's an interesting gift to give to Trump after winning the election.

vxbush 11/13/2024 5:54:50 AM

6

Missouri v. Biden UPDATE: Judge Orders ‘Jurisdictional Discovery’ to Settle Govt’s Bad Faith Arguments

You have to love this line in the judge's decision (bolding mine): 

Rather than reach the merits, the Supreme Court held that Plaintiffs here failed to show standing sufficient for a preliminary injunction. See id. Accordingly, our judgment was vacated, and the case was remanded back to our jurisdiction "for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's opinion." Missouri v. Biden, 114 F.4th 406 (5th Circuit. 2024). Charged with this mandate, we now "consistent[ly] "proceed[]"--unburdened by what has been. 

Kamala, you are apparently the progenitor of a new speech meme.

vxbush 11/13/2024 5:57:53 AM

7

vxbush 11/13/2024 6:01:37 AM

8

Reply to vxbush in 7:

Reply to vxbush in 6:

And this judge's decision has lots and lots of idioms in it, which makes me wonder whether it was intentional or simply a pattern of writing for this judge.

JCM 11/13/2024 8:27:34 AM

9

Reply to vxbush in 2:

In my fevered dream world?

Every department and agency that is not enumerated in Article gets shut down.

Realistically, departments get trimmed, they over reaching regulations get revoked.

vxbush 11/13/2024 8:43:13 AM

10

In #9 JCM said: In my fevered dream world? Every department and agency that is not enumerated in Article gets shut down. Realistically, departments get trimmed, they over reaching regulations get revoked.

While I can see the logic behind that, I hesitant to go that far for one major reason: 

The world today, technologically, politically, and psychologically is a very different place than it was during the 18th century. As a result, I'm not convinced our government could do an adequate job if we stripped things back to simply what was listed in the Constitution. That is absolutely a great starting point, but because we're coming off of nearly 100 years of progressive rule, there are a whole lot of assumptions as to what is part of the federal government. Is most of that bloat/useless? Yes. 

But: If we got rid of the Food and Drug Administration right now, for example, I think there are several behemoth companies who would take advantage of that situation and never look back, and the potential for harm does exist, especially with certain drugs on the market. Those didn't exist 200 years ago or even 100 years ago. 

Do I want something as sprawling and all-powerful as the FDA? Heavens, no. It's rule by the elite with little knowledge or understanding and a lot of fakery when it comes to following regulations without any actual substance. 

Crowd-sourcing side effects to drugs can be done easily today, but there needs to be a mechanism to keep those companies making such product accountable. I have a feeling the special perks drug makers give to doctors and clinics are going to continue into the foreseeable future, which is putting a big fat thumb on the scale of deciding which meds to prescribe. We need to make that thumb result in no additional power or money. 

Do I know how to do that? No. But I'd like to see Musk and Ramaswamy take advantage of crowdsourcing to get ideas on how the government could be streamlined and reigned in.

buzzsawmonkey 11/13/2024 8:49:38 AM

11

In #1 vxbush said: Which party has most often been involved in these issues? Is it evenly split between Democrats and Republicans? I'm asking honestly, because it sure seems like all the areas that were having issues this past election were Democrat strongholds. 

I haven't been tracking it closely, but it does indeed seem like the main malefactors in poor Election Board performance in recent years were primarily in urban areas, i.e., primarily Democratic bailiwicks.  

When the Tea Party demonstrations resulted in a large election turnout of Republicans/conservatives at the state level, I was hoping that their primary focus would be to clean up the various Election Boards, but that did not happen.

JCM 11/13/2024 10:01:04 AM

12

Reply to vxbush in 10:

There is a correct way to add an agency or department.

Constitutional Amendment. That way the States get input in the department.

Also we need to get Congress away from giving agency blank checks for regulations. Any regulation with penalty of law need to originate in Congress.  

vxbush 11/13/2024 11:27:42 AM

13

In #12 JCM said: There is a correct way to add an agency or department. Constitutional Amendment. That way the States get input in the department.

Oh, that's an interesting idea. It would certainly preclude a lot of crap going on in DC, and the states have hardly any power now to control the federal government. 

But that would seem to have a lot of the same concerns that a constitutional convention has had, would it not?