Senate The US Politics 2.0 Discussion Thread

So, the couple that are the poster children of the 'pronatalist movement' - that have the administration considering 'baby bonuses' and Nazi-esque 'mother's medals' for large numbers of children - were asked if there were any people that they did not want to have children in the US. Their answer? 'Low-income people' because they are 'a drain on the tax system'.

 

@Luke02, are you saying I support President LittleHands?? Boy, have you got that wrong!

 

Wealthy Americans having lots of children as a display of wealth is already a thing.

 

Trouble in Paradise...

“It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along, and has to be dealt with differently, through “Banking” or “Secondary Sanctions?” Too many people are dying!!!” Trump wrote.
​

 

We reached it the day he was inaugurated for his second term.

Which will be at the sole discretion of the Trump administration and his FBI/DOJ cabal.

Our institutions are basically gone. Prepare for autocracy to be formally declared by July 4th. It's already here in everything but name. He's waiting for his military parade to roll it out completely.

 

July 4th?

Nah. it'll be on his birthday. A month earlier. Military parade. Birth of a new constitution. Birth of a dictator.

 

Well, we can't get all the way to that 250th, can we?

 

What is with billionaires flaunting their wealth? Do they have a death wish? It's like they want to be eaten.

 

@DarthIshyZ Not at all as I apologize if that is the impression I get. I'm just saying no matter what happens, 40% of the country will fall Trump off the face of the earth and the overwhelming majority of them (90%+) are conservative white Christians particularly of the evangelical variety.

And I'm shocked it to took the press this long to figure this out. His entire cabient are just a coaplay idiots:

https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/trump-cabinet-social-media-6f58091f

Makes sense though since over half are just people Trump saw on TV or in the case of Bondi (kept him out of jail) or RFJ Jr (his endorsement help with non traditional voters who think vaccines are WMD) he owe them and for once Trump paid him.

 

Birth of a Nation? Seems apropos given the current state of the Republican party under Trump.

 

Am I reading this article correctly?

So, am I understanding that the husband, a US Citizen, was deported to Cuba with his wife???

Also, I thought the undocumented / illegal / whateveryoucallthem had to commit a crime to be deported.

 

Yes. This is the stated Trump administration response to criticism of the first term's family separation policy: to not separate the family by deporting the whole family, US citizens included.

 

When I was in my 20s, I dated a woman who had divorced an Egyptian guy who just married her to get into the US. So, I guess ICE's response to Becky today would be "Ah. You married an Egyptian? You're being deported to Egypt now."

 

Even I am worried about what ICE might do to me and I am born American citizen. My crime is being brown and speaking Spanish.

 

They can't read, nor can be bothered to read.

That's why he's cruel to his own children and will throw them under the bus if necessary.

 

Or Curtis Yarvin's or Peter Thiel's ideas (both of whom Vance is a big fan). It surprised me the democrats didn't jump on that.

 

You're assuming they won't just follow blindly. All positives reinforce their resolve. All negatives are fake news or unimportant.

 

Or they are just convinced that this is right and what they want. Because from the outside it looks to us like a lot of US citizens seem to think democracy isn’t such a big thing.

 

A lot of them do not consider it such a big thing. That's been an established pattern where they only view it as a means to get what they want rather than an independent value. Not unlike how they've always been about free speech.

 

The greatest collective sin of Americans is in perpetuating a highly individualistic society where everything is only about "me-me-me-me-me" and far too few people care at all about how their wishes impact anyone outside their little circle.

If people would care more about others and consider the impacts their actions would have on the larger society, and be willing to sacrifice a little themselves to gain a lot for society, the US would be a much better place.

But that's called "empathy" and apparently that's been declared a sin, or was it a disease? I forget which.

 

Yes, some Americans prefer a dictatorship, or think Trump should be a dictator. A lot wouldn't have wanted that, though. Too late now though.

 

Elon is the only one of the Uber wealthy who I know did it. Honestly growing up every single family I knew had 2-3 kids never 4 and never 1 so 4 would be just above normal. Crazy is 5 and insane is like 6 and above

like I cannot fathom 6 children in a single family

and that’s parents of my generation. I can fathom it of my parents generation my mom had 4 siblings and my dad 3 for instance both above my norm.

I know my mom thought about having a fourth but came to realize me and my brother were already more than enough (my sister was much more chill) no ADHD or Dyslexia like me and my brother) and no almost dying at birth cause he was born to early like my brother

although I always wondered what being a big brother would have been like. Probably would have been fun. Especially if it was a sister. Anyway getting way off topic

 

I don't think it's "individualism". Americans like to say we're individualistic, but when it comes to the details of policy preferences, I don't think we're really that different from people anywhere else. No, what's happened is because Republicans dominate the overall narrative. They made Donald Trump out to be something he's not, and made Democrats out to be something they're not. That's it.

 

Please read this. This is a big, big deal that is (and probably will continue) to fly under the radar. But this is a really big deal:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presiden...ulatory-budgeting-to-unleash-american-energy/

Spoiler: Quote

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:

Section 1. Purpose. In our country, laws are supposed to provide the certainty and order necessary to foster liberty and innovation. Instead, our vast regulatory structure often serves to constrict ordered liberty, not promote it. The United States Code itself is more than 60,000 pages. But unelected agency officials write most of the complex, legally binding rules on top of that, often stretching these statutory provisions beyond what the Congress enacted.

In particular, the previous administration added more pages to the Federal Register than any other in history, with the result that the Code of Federal Regulations now approaches a staggering 200,000 pages. These regulations linger in such volume that serious reexamination seldom occurs.
This regime of governance-by-regulator has imposed particularly severe costs on energy production, where innovation is critical. The net result is an energy landscape perpetually trapped in the 1970s. By rescinding outdated regulations that serve as a drag on progress, we can stimulate innovation and deliver prosperity to everyday Americans.

This order directs certain agencies to incorporate a sunset provision into their regulations governing energy production to the extent permitted by law, thus compelling those agencies to reexamine their regulations periodically to ensure that those rules serve the public good.

Sec. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this order:
(a) “Conditional Sunset Date” means the date a regulation will cease to be effective and be removed from the Code of Federal Regulations, if the agency does not extend the Sunset Date pursuant to section 4(d) of this order.
(b) “Covered Agency” means one of the agencies listed in section 3(a) of this order.
(c) “Covered Regulation” means a regulation issued in whole or in part pursuant to a statutory authority listed in sections 3(b)-(j) of this order.
(d) “DOGE Team Lead” means the leader of the DOGE Team at each agency as described in Executive Order 14158.
(e) “Regulation” means each part, subpart, or individual provision of the Code of Federal Regulations promulgated under an agency rule as defined in 5 U.S.C. 551(4).

Sec. 3. Covered Agencies and Regulations. (a) This order applies to the following agencies and their subcomponents: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the Department of Energy (DoE); the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC); and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). It further applies to the following agency subcomponents: the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE), and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), all within the Department of the Interior; and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), within the United States Army.
(b) For the DoE, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the following statutes and any amendments thereto:
(i) the Atomic Energy Act of 1954;
(ii) the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act of 1987;
(iii) the Energy Policy Act of 1992;
(iv) the Energy Policy Act of 2005; and
(v) the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
(c) For FERC, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the following statutes and any amendments thereto:
(i) the Federal Power Act of 1935;
(ii) the Natural Gas Act of 1938; and
(iii) the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act of 1978.
(d) For the NRC, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the following statutes and any amendments thereto:
(i) the Atomic Energy Act of 1954;
(ii) the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974; and
(iii) the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982.
(e) For the OSMRE, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and any amendments thereto.
(f) For the BLM, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the following statutes and any amendments thereto:
(i) the Mining Act of 1872;
(ii) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976; and
(iii) the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
(g) For the BOEM, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the following statutes and any amendments thereto:
(i) the Outer Continental Shelf Act of 1953; and
(ii) the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
(h) For the BSEE, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Act of 1953 and any amendments thereto.
(i) For the FWS, this order applies to all regulations issued pursuant to the following statutes and any amendments thereto:
(i) the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act;
(ii) the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918;
(iii) the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1934;
(iv) the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act of 1965;
(v) the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972;
(vi) the Endangered Species Act of 1973;
(vii) the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976; and
(viii) the Coastal Barrier Resources Act of 1982.
(j) For the EPA and ACE, within 30 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of the EPA and Secretary of the Army shall provide to the President, through the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB Director), a list of statutes vesting EPA and ACE with regulatory authority that shall be subject to this order.

Sec. 4. Zero-Based Regulating. (a) To the extent consistent with applicable law, each of the Covered Agencies shall issue a sunset rule, effective not later than September 30, 2025, that inserts a Conditional Sunset Date into each of their Covered Regulations.
(b) The sunset rule shall provide that each Covered Regulation in effect on the date of this order shall have a Conditional Sunset Date of 1 year after the effective date of the sunset rule, subject to the process set forth in subsection (d) of this section. Unless the extension condition specified in subsection (d) of this section is satisfied, agencies will treat Covered Regulations as ceasing to be effective on that date for all purposes. An agency shall not take any action to enforce such an ineffective regulation and, to the maximum extent permitted by law, shall remove it from the Code of Federal Regulations.
(c) In any new Covered Regulation, to the maximum extent consistent with law, the relevant Covered Agency shall include a Conditional Sunset Date that is not more than 5 years in the future. Amendments to any Covered Regulation shall provide that they do not reset that regulation’s Conditional Sunset Date and shall be subject to the same Conditional Sunset Date as the amended regulation. The OMB Director may exempt a new regulation or amendment from the requirements of this paragraph if he determines that the new regulation or amendment has a net deregulatory effect.
(d) The sunset provision added to existing and new Covered Regulations shall provide that the agency will offer the public an opportunity to comment on the costs and benefits of each regulation, such as through a request for information, prior to a rule’s expiration, and following such opportunity the Conditional Sunset Date for that Covered Regulation may be extended if the agency finds an extension is warranted. A request for information shall not automatically extend the Conditional Sunset Date. A Covered Agency may extend the Conditional Sunset Date for a particular Covered Regulation as many times as is appropriate, but never to a date more than 5 years in the future.

Sec. 5. Implementation. (a) Neither a determination to extend the Conditional Sunset Date of a particular regulation, nor a regulation that expires as a result this order, shall count towards the ten-for-one regulatory requirement in Executive Order 14192 of January 31, 2025 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation).
(b) Agency heads shall coordinate with their DOGE Team Leads and the Office of Management and Budget to implement this order.
(c) This order shall not apply to regulatory permitting regimes authorized by statute.

Sec. 6. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any agency, person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other agencies, persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the OMB Director relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 9, 2025.

So... every single regulation affecting energy and the environment will be gone by October 1st. Unless saved/updated, but those regulations will then still have a mandated "sunset" date.

Every. Single. Regulation:
... relating to the Department of Energy, the EPA, NOAA, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Ocean Management, US Fish & Wildlife Services, the Nuclear Regulatory Committee, the Army Corps of Engineers, a good chunk of the Department of Interior... the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Nuclear Waste Act, the Mining Act of 1872, the Federal Power Act of 1935, and more.

These laws and agencies will still exist (for now?)... but remember:
-Congress wrote/created them.
-Congress is not an assembly of environmental scientists and engineers.
-Congress knows they're not the experts: that's why the legislation is broad and vague, it invests in these departments/agencies/committees/boards/commissions the power to interpret the law and create regulations in order to carry out the intentions of the law. That's how government works.

Does the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) need some serious maintenance, updating, clean-up, consolidation, and better organization? Yes.

Should every single regulation on the environment and energy be gotten rid of, unless picked out by the Trump administration and revised by them? Hell No.

I doubt a team of a hundred humans could even read every single one between now and October, even if it was most of their full-time jobs.

Don't underestimate the impacts this could have.

This is just the part of the CFR written by the EPA: Title 40.
https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/regulations#cfr
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40

It has 1700 sections in use (of just title 40). Not regulations, sections that organize and divide the EPA's regulations.

Part 260 (of about 1700), governs Hazardous Waste Management Systems
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/subchapter-I/part-260

^That Part 260, if you go to the link, is itself VERY long.

It's highly technical, and is interconnected with other regulations.

An example of one small part of Part 260:

Spoiler: A portion of part 11 of Part 260 of Subchapter 1 of Chapter 1 of Title 40, which is just part of laying the groundwork for the rest of the Title 40

The following methods as published in the test methods compendium known as “Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods,” EPA Publication SW-846, Third Edition.

(i) Method 0010, Modified Method 5 Sampling Train, Revision 1, dated August 2018, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(ii) Method 0011, Sampling for Selected Aldehyde and Ketone Emissions from Stationary Sources, Revision 1, dated August 2018, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261 and appendix IX to part 266

(iii) Method 0020, Source Assessment Sampling System (SASS), Revision 1, dated August 2018, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(iv) Method 0023A, Sampling Method for Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and Polychlorinated Dibenzofuran Emissions from Stationary Sources, Revision 2, dated August 2018, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261, § 266.104(e), and appendix IX to part 266.

(v) Method 0030, Volatile Organic Sampling Train, dated September 1986 and in the Basic Manual, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(vi) Method 0031, Sampling Method for Volatile Organic Compounds (SMVOC), dated December 1996 and in Update III, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(vii) Method 0040, Sampling of Principal Organic Hazardous Constituents from Combustion Sources Using Tedlar® Bags, dated December 1996 and in Update III, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(viii) Method 0050, Isokinetic HCl/Cl2 Emission Sampling Train, dated December 1996 and in Update III, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261, § 266.107, and appendix IX to part 266.

(ix) Method 0051, Midget Impinger HCl/Cl2 Emission Sampling Train, Revision 1, dated August 2018, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261, § 266.107, and appendix IX to part 266.

(x) Method 0060, Determination of Metals in Stack Emissions, dated December 1996 and in Update III, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261, § 266.106, and appendix IX to part 266.

(xi) Method 0061, Determination of Hexavalent Chromium Emissions from Stationary Sources, dated December 1996 and in Update III, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261 § 266.106, and appendix IX to part 266.

(xii) Method 1010B, Test Methods for Flash Point by Pensky-Martens Closed-Cup Tester, dated December 2018, IBR approved for § 261.21 and appendix IX to part 261.

(xiii) Method 1020C, Standard Test Methods for Flash Point by Setaflash (Small Scale) Closed-Cup Apparatus, dated December 2018, IBR approved for § 261.21 and appendix IX to part 261.

(xiv) Method 1110A, Corrosivity Toward Steel, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for § 261.22 and appendix IX to part 261.

(xv) Method 1310B, Extraction Procedure (EP) Toxicity Test Method and Structural Integrity Test, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xvi) Method 1311, Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure, dated July 1992 and in Update I, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261, and §§ 261.24, 268.7, 268.40.

(xvii) Method 1312, Synthetic Precipitation Leaching Procedure, dated September 1994 and in Update III, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xviii) Method 1320, Multiple Extraction Procedure, dated September 1986 and in the Basic Manual, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xix) Method 1330A, Extraction Procedure for Oily Wastes, dated July 1992 and in Update I, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xx) Method 9010C, Total and Amenable Cyanide: Distillation, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261 and §§ 268.40, 268.44, 268.48.

(xxi) Method 9012B, Total and Amenable Cyanide (Automated Colorimetric, with Off-Line Distillation), dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261 and §§ 268.40, 268.44, 268.48.

(xxii) Method 9040C, pH Electrometric Measurement, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261 and § 261.22.

(xxiii) Method 9045D, Soil and Waste pH, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xxiv) Method 9060A, Total Organic Carbon, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261, and §§ 264.1034, 264.1063, 265.1034, 265.1063.

(xxv) Method 9070A, n-Hexane Extractable material (HEM) for Aqueous Samples, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xxvi) Method 9071B, n-Hexane Extractable Material (HEM) for Sludge, Sediment, and Solid Samples, dated April 1998 and in Update IIIA, IBR approved for appendix IX to part 261.

(xxvii) Method 9095B, Paint Filter Liquids Test, dated November 2004 and in Update IIIB, IBR approved, appendix IX to part 261, and §§ 264.190, 264.314, 265.190, 265.314, 265.1081, 267.190(a), 268.32.

(d) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 1 Batterymarch Park, P.O. Box 9101, Quincy, MA 02269-9101, (800) 344-3555, www.nfpa.org/.

(1) NFPA 30, “Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code,” 1977 Edition, IBR approved for §§ 262.16(b), 264.198(b), 265.198(b), and 267.202(b).

(2) NFPA 30, “Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code,” 1981 Edition, IBR approved for §§ 262.16(b), 264.198(b), 265.198(b), and 267.202(b).

(e) Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Economic Cooperation and Development, Environment Directorate, 2 rue André Pascal, F-75775 Paris Cedex 16, France, owww.oecd-ilibrary.org/.

(1) Guidance Manual for the Control of Transboundary Movements of Recoverable Wastes, copyright 2009, Annex B: OECD Consolidated List of Wastes Subject to the Green Control Procedure and Annex C: OECD Consolidated List of Wastes Subject to the Amber Control Procedure, IBR approved for §§ 262.82(a), 262.83(b), (d), and (g), and 262.84(b) and (d).

(2) [Reserved]

As just that tiny part of Title 40, governed by the EPA, shows... it governs what to do about corroded steel, flammable liquids, n-Hexane Extractable material, the pH levels of soil and waste, procedures for oily waste, cyanide, toxicity tests, Isokinetic HCl/Cl2 emissions, Hexavalent Chromium Emissions, Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins, Polychlorinated Dibenzofuran Emissions, Ketone emissions, Test Methods for Flash Point by Pensky-Martens Closed-Cup Tester,the process on how to scientifically determine the metals that can be found in the hazardous waste being analyzed and managed, and more.

Do you expect a dozen DOGE Staffers, and some of Trump's EPA staffers (that haven't quit or been laid off) even knowing what some of those things even are? And all before October 1st? And figure out which to save, and which to update/revise, with all of the ones they don't just being repealed by October?

A tiny, tiny, part of Title 40.

And this goes BEYOND Title 40, since that's only the EPA. See the other laws and agencies mentioned above.

Every single thing the government actually does is determined within those 49 active titles. And at least one of them, and a very key one since the industrial revolution started, is basically being scrapped, with some of it replaced by a very lean Trump version of it.

All gone, unless given a Trump spin and a new expiration date... in a little over 5 months.

Will businesses, state governments, local governments, and other organizations likely continue many (if not most) of the procedures they've been doing for so long, unless they have a reason not to? Most likely. But they also know the regulations they don't like, or a part they might find convenient because they don't know the full technical understanding on why something is done or why it's done in a certain way, and will now be able to ignore those repealed regulations (or go by whatever more laissez-faire regulation the Trump admin has replaced it with). Some of it might turn out ok, but this will definitely lead to many things not going "ok." Things that we might have long taken for granted. And there certainly will be bad actors, apathetic actors, and stupid actors.


Sorry this is long, but for those who might not know a lot about how all this fits together... I think I've been able to explain how this is a very big deal. I hope we live in states that already have similar regulations, or can write news laws/regulations to deal with this very soon.

My own question... did the husband DECIDE to go with his wife (and they both decided to take their kid with them)? Or were the husband and kid involuntarily deported along with her?

 

Wonder how long before we have a nuclear accident in America.