Finland and Sweden have applied for membership in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a defensive alliance originally formed in 1949 to resist the expansion of the Soviet Union and now standing against Russian expansion under president Vladimir Putin. Now the 30 member nations will consider the applications. They are expected to go through, although Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said he does not view their applications positively, likely to gain concessions from the United States in ongoing negotiations. The timeline to membership will be shortened since the countries are at risk from Putin’s current policies.
One must surely ask, then, what exactly the "executive branch" is supposed to "execute," and how. Using a corporation as a example, the CEO is expected to implement directives from the Board of Directors who have been elected by the stockholders. The Board is not responsible for implementation, the CEO is.
While some legislation is poorly written, I think it is impossible as well as unwise to try to write all details of implementation into every legislation. The alternatives are placing implementation within Congress, which defies the Constitution, or not implementing any laws that are passed, which makes government by law irrelevant, replacing reason and equality with "might makes right." Fearful news from this decision if it is allowed to stand.
Yeah, the decision gets appealed - to the court that wants to overthrow the government.
If there isn't some way to get enough Senators to allow a court expansion - which given the way the Senate works is close to impossible now - the country is a ship headed for the rocks. The useful (i.e. blue) states will take to the lifeboats in the form of secession, leaving the rest to sink when their blue state tax payment welfare gets cut off.
The Republicans’ voting against funding the federal government’s buying of foreign baby formula shows that, once again, it’s not about the babies. It’s all about Republican Party power and making President Biden look ineffectual.
The nondelegation issue is chilling. The chaos of making Congress set up committees to handle everything that the current federal departments handle would help prove Putin’s contention that democracies are too inefficient. I had preferred the imposition of 18 year term limits on SCOTUS rather than increasing the number of judges, but that might move too slowly to avoid the crazy thinking that seems to go along with being recommended by the Federalist Society.
Two things off these frightening topics. I have a HUGE list of all things President Biden has accomplised if anyone wants them to use against those who contine to say he's done nothing. Email me at firstname.lastname@example.org. 2nd. I am receiving many emails with John Fetterman in the subject line asking for donations for John. When I check the sender it is someone else and the donation will be split between John and the person sending the email. This includes Chuck Schumer. I am going to o ly give directly to those candidates so my donations are not diluted.
How can Republicans in Congress be opposed to appropriating some money to solve the apparent shortage of baby formula? Simple, they think that extending the problem will harm the Democrats more than the Republicans. But isn't this an instructive example of the much noted aversion of Republicans to do anything at all for the benefit of families with children, after insisting that all zygotes be raised to full personhood?
Non delegation. Sounds like 2008 on steroids with the accompanying recession because no one was checking financial institutions shenanigans of greed. Do we have to have a 1929 crash in this century since we seem to be repeating the major events of the first part of the twentieth century? Scary!
What a frightening letter. Here are a series of events that demonstrate to Americans that the GQP won't support even the most basic legislation - because it came from a Democratic leadership and Administration. This is not simply "politics". This is anti-American partisanship. Think about this. During a time where HUMAN BABIES are literally STARVING, 192 Republican Representatives voted against funding a solution for providing BABY formula. How does an elected official defend that?
Now I understand. Based on the issues in this letter, Republicans are pro life unless the baby needs to eat. Republicans are anti violence unless the violence is created by Neo Nazis and White Supremacists. And Republicans are pro American business even if they pollute, abuse their employees and sell dangerously contaminated products. And insider trading would be fine as well...
By the logic of the "non delegation theory", I guess we could save a lot of money by just disbanding our entire military structure! But we wouldn't do that, would we? Too many Republican pockets are lined with Federal defense dollars.
And now I understand what the Republican "platform" is. To create an America that is pure white and free to carry weapons. An America that has no central government to guarantee our human rights. An America run by Oligarchs - and yahoos with weapons. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Jasus Christ on a crutch! We seem to have developed a culture that is intent on committing kamikaze. We have. 1) global heating, 2) an energy crisis, 3) a population crisis, 4) an environmental crisis .. but hey, who gives a damn. And it's not just the US of A - we have Russia, Gulf States, China, etc, it's not a good look for the future - we are, it seems, intent of destroying our only planet. I put a lot of this down to the the massive urbanisation of our populations. "Green trees? - oh yes, I think I've seen them in pictures". "Honey, can you turn up the A/C - my ice cream is melting".
just to keep us aware - this is what the Repubs want... for some reason this dynamic seems uncontrollable.
>This paragraph seems to sum, in addition the dilemma we face as the nature of some of the “beasts”
“That is what companies are for.
They are designed to multiply capital; what they make is irrelevant.
Torpedoes, food, clothes, furniture. It is all the same.
To that end they will do anything to survive and prosper.
Can they make more money employing slave labour?
If so, they must do so.
Can they increase profits by selling things which kill others?
They must do so again.
What if they lay waste the landscape, ruin forests, uproot communities and poison the rivers?
They are obliged to do all these things, if they can increase their profits.”
“A company is a moral imbecile.
It has no sense of right or wrong.
Any restraints have to come from the outside, from laws and customs which forbid it from doing certain things of which we disapprove.
But it is a restraint which reduces profits.
Which is why all companies will strain forever to break the bounds of the law, to act unfettered in their pursuit of advantage.
That is the only way they can survive because the more powerful will devour the weak.
And because it is the nature of capital, which is wild, longs to be free and chafes at each and every restriction imposed on it.”<
from Stone’s Fall by Iain Pears
So, 203 Republicans in Congress voted against having a task force that would share information across government agencies to combat domestic terrorism by white supremacists and Nazis. Not five or ten right wing radical racists voted against this, 203 Republicans did. They did so after yet ANOTHER shooting by a white supremacist. I have a different replacement theory, meaning these 203 Republicans need to be replaced in Congress.
If Congress created the Securities and Exchange Commission in 1934, with certain regulatory responsibilities, how can a court, under any legal theory whatsoever, say that they (Congress) had no authority to do that? Clearly this is a case where the right-wing business elite is pushing to dismantle all regulation because it is oppressive to their capitalistic freedom.
Regarding the SEC: I watched as a bunch of crooks sold worthless "mortgage backed" securities as "derivatives" that they knew were worthless, to investors worldwide, and not backed by any assets in 2007 and 2008. The SEC ended up doing nothing. Not one arrest.
When the entire scheme came apart and everyone who had bet against the scheme by shorting banks brought the entire world economy down?
The SEC arrested ONE person (not for bank fraud or mortgage securities fraud but for insider trading). Martha Stewart. For insider trading unrelated to mortgage fraud.
Not one of the perpetrators of the fake mortgage backed securities was arrested. Not one.
Worse, the government stepped in with both direct payments to banks and the Fed began buying, for the first time in history, the worthless mortgage bonds off the books of the banks, the first time the Fed have ever printed money to buy a fake asset that was worthless. Or even a good asset.
What's my point you ask?
The SEC is already toothless and useless. Nobody on Wall Street is worried about that agency and nobody should be.
I think the executive branch, through the SEC, should regulate business and should arrest criminals.
But, nobody is regulating anything up in DC.
I love Obama but do you know to whom his first $400,000 speech was after 8 years of him using the Fed to give them money by buying mortgage backed securities??
Yep. A Bank.
Everyone, it is already all messed up in the regulatory domain. Companies pay off members of the regulatory agencies to get what they want.
The final amount of mortgage backed securities bought by the Fed? Five Trillion Dollars.
Those are mostly STILL on the Fed's books. Today. Owned by, yes, you and me.
They are still worthless.
So, I am not losing any sleep about an agency that is already doing nothing doing more of nothing.
Well, non-delegation wasn’t on my list of terrors for the new day. But, as always, thank you.
The Federalist Society is behind this:
"Since 2019, a majority of the current Supreme Court has expressed interest in revitalizing the nondelegation doctrine, which prohibits Congress from delegating any of its lawmaking power to regulatory agencies in the executive branch. Unfortunately, relying on a highly deferential application of this constitutional principle, the Court has not invoked the nondelegation doctrine to strike down a statute since 1935. That contributed to broad delegations of rulemaking power to regulatory agencies in the decades that followed. A reinvigoration of the nondelegation doctrine, accordingly, has the potential to restrict the growth and power of these agencies, better known today as the 'administrative state.'"
Thank you Heather.
“As Justice Elena Kagan pointed out, the nondelegation doctrine would mean that “most of Government is unconstitutional.””
Where the right would lead US is so very wrong. I feel afraid and sickened and not a little indignant. “Damn the torpedoes!”
Well, the two Trojan Horses had better STFU when Democrats try to expand the SC, or am I living in dream land. Republicans have smelled blood and they will stop at NOTHING to destroy our current government and bring back the business (Repub) rule that brought us every recession in the last 100+ years. Every one.