|
Shooting Blanks posted:Unless I missed something, this is inaccurate. John Sharp is the Chancellor of the Texas A&M system, and the person referenced in the article. He has not resigned. Katherine Banks, the president of TAMU did resign over a wholly unrelated matter - the failed hiring of an esteemed journalist to restart TAMU's journalism program. That fiasco is because others within the Texas A&M believed hiring her would be a nod to DEI (the proposed hire was a Black woman, currently tenured at UT). More information here. The President of Texas A&M resigned last week, but the Chancellor did not. quote:The revelation comes as Texas A&M is reeling over concerns that the university allowed politically motivated outsiders to derail the hiring of Kathleen McElroy, a Black journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin, to revive the journalism school at Texas A&M. The subsequent outcry over how Texas A&M handled the situation prompted the university president to resign last week, and the interim dean of arts and sciences stepped down from that role but will remain a professor. The former President was involved, but resigned primarily because of a different scandal. The Chancellor was much more involved in this instance (as far as we know) and has not resigned. Thanks, I should have been more clear in case people didn't read the entire article.
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Sure. So then you have to consider the impact of such an action on public opinion, on pro-fascist turnout, on the actions of the opposition… leaving aside what LT and MPF pointed out about just how far this is from actually happening, it’s not just an “immediately jump to the most extreme solution” situation because you don’t know the most extreme solution is going to be the one that prevents fascism. Do you think there wouldn’t be a backlash to a liberal federal government imposing its will on a conservative state through violence? The most extreme solution has always been the only thing that stops fascism. When they fight back, crush them. Stomp them into the dirt just like we did last time, then let's do Reconstruction properly. The only thing that's going to correct course in these shithole states is threatened or actual violence from the federal government. Unless you've got ideas for turning Kentucky blue? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 17:09
|
|
|
Teamsters say they have reached a tentative deal with UPS to avert a strike. No exact details for everything yet, but the union says they won the following concessions: - Pay raises. - A/C in all newly purchased cars. All existing cars without A/C will be retrofitted with two fans and a heat exhaust pipe. - MLK day and Memorial day off. - Part-time workers get guaranteed raises (on top of normal raises) if they stay employed for longer. - Members with the same job title will all get paid the same. If your wage is currently lower than the base wage of the highest person with the same title, then it will be raised to match that person. New hires will start at that level. - Limits on driver-facing cameras. - 5-day work week caps. https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1683866612116627456 Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Jul 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 17:31
|
|
|
Wait....good news? In USCE? Reported.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 17:54
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Wait....good news? In USCE? Reported. quote:On Tuesday, July 25, 2023, the President signed into law:
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:10
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Here is some more I feel like the Republicans thought this would be some own on the Democrats and Joe Biden but hey, whatever works.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Here is some more This is bad, it's designed to force limits on the scope of rules and create new means of sabotaging (and increasing the cost of) rulemaking by litigating this requirement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:50
|
|
|
Shrecknet posted:Maybe wrong, but an interesting viewpoint. It's kind of dumb actually. People throw around the word treason a lot but it actually has a narrow definition legally and Trump did not commit treason. There is no possible world in which you can convict him of that unless he's literally giving ISIS or Al Queda information to inform attacks against the United States. The Russia stuff, even if they bothered to prove it, wouldn't count. His stupid coup is also not treason, technically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:This is bad, it's designed to force limits on the scope of rules and create new means of sabotaging (and increasing the cost of) rulemaking by litigating this requirement. This doesn't change the actual rule-making itself. It just requires a "for dummies" short-hand version to be made available. 99.99% of people are never going to read it anyway. But, 100 extra words is a pretty minor burden.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:54
|
|
|
chatgpt, write me a summary of this bill in fewer than 100 words
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:55
|
|
|
I remember how helpful Bill Barr's summary of the Mueller Report was
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 18:59
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:This doesn't change the actual rule-making itself. It just requires a "for dummies" short-hand version to be made available. Who is the "for dummies" shorthand version actually useful for, though? The Venn diagram of "people who deeply care about federal agency rulemaking" and "people who can't read the rules themselves and don't pay someone to read the rules in their place" doesn't seem like it'd have all that much overlap. Moreover, I feel like that overlap would mostly consist of anti-regulation conservative activists who want to compile a list of regulations they can claim are unreasonable to kick up a big public fuss about. And that's probably why this bill was sponsored by four Republican senators, only one Democrat, and everyone's least favorite Independent (Sinema). Nobody objected to it in the Senate, which makes sense since it's a minor thing with little immediate impact, but I'm not sure I'd cheer it as an unambiguously good thing either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 19:08
|
|
|
Pretty interesting and surprising development. The DOE is investigating legacy admissions and donor admissions at Harvard to bring a lawsuit challenging their legality. They are specifically investigating whether legacy admissions and donor admissions violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act by disproportionately favoring white students. Title VI restricts entities that receive federal funding from discriminating based on race. If the DOE argues that it does and they either win a court case or the schools accept the decision, then private schools would have to either end legacy and donor admissions or decline any federal funding. It looks like research backing up the charge was released on Monday, so that is not great news for the schools that want to keep it. quote:Advocates say that if colleges cannot grant an advantage to applicants for the color of their skin, then it is unfair to offer an advantage to students for who their parents are. Research released Monday confirms that legacy applicants, especially those from high-income backgrounds, receive the largest boost in the admissions process at highly selective colleges, followed by recruited athletes, who mostly come from wealthy backgrounds and are overwhelmingly white at top schools. High-income students who attend private high schools are also more likely to gain admission to top colleges, the research found. Wesleyan University has already announced that they will pre-emptively end legacy admissions and Tufts University has announced "a review" of the policy. Dartmouth University says it will continue to accept legacy and donor admissions, but did not specify what they would do if the DoE tries to sue over it. The other Ivy League schools did not provide any statements about what their plans are in response to the investigation. https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1683877635359637506 quote:US Department of Education opens investigation into Harvard’s legacy and donor admissions process
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 19:09
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Pretty interesting and surprising development. Feels like tit-for-tat for the affirmative action ruling. Which is good, IMO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 19:15
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Who is the "for dummies" shorthand version actually useful for, though? The Venn diagram of "people who deeply care about federal agency rulemaking" and "people who can't read the rules themselves and don't pay someone to read the rules in their place" doesn't seem like it'd have all that much overlap. Moreover, I feel like that overlap would mostly consist of anti-regulation conservative activists who want to compile a list of regulations they can claim are unreasonable to kick up a big public fuss about. And that's probably why this bill was sponsored by four Republican senators, only one Democrat, and everyone's least favorite Independent (Sinema). I think making government more accessible is a good thing, even if you never interact with 99.99999999999999999999999999999% of rule making, you might have to one day and understanding what the rules will do will allow for better input.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 19:51
|
|
|
Yet another Biden family member has been caught in a pattern of outrageous behaviorquote:President Biden’s nearly 2-year-old German shepherd Commander bit seven people in a four-month period after former first dog Major was ousted from the White House over similar aggressive behavior, according to internal Secret Service communications reviewed by The Post. I would like to see extensive hearings about this in which congresspeople display many pictures of this malefactor
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
Posted in the primary thread, but in the spirit of fun: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/07/25/desantis-lets-go-of-more-than-1-3-of-campaign-staff-as-reset-continues-00108046 DeSantis laid off 1/3rd of his staff, and talks about the turnover and restructuring, but this is the only line you really need to see quote:They also said they would aim to reduce costs by doing smaller, more intimate events and cutting down its travel expenditures.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Yet another Biden family member has been caught in a pattern of outrageous behavior That’s a terribly raised dog. If your dog bites seven people you hosed up bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:10
|
|
|
selec posted:That’s a terribly raised dog. If your dog bites seven people you hosed up bad. If your *second* dog bites seven *more* people you should maybe reconsider dog ownership, at least until you're out of an extremely busy and stressful environment
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:12
|
|
|
Meatball Ron is going to be the Kamala Harris of this primary. Had tons of money but nobody wants to actually vote for them and they had to quit before voting actually started
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:12
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Meatball Ron is going to be the Kamala Harris of this primary. Had tons of money but nobody wants to actually vote for them and they had to quit before voting actually started How can you say that when he's clearly ¡Jeb!-ing at a very advanced level
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
Can someone who’s invested in the UPS thing let us know if the deal is a good one or a bad one? Anecdotally I talked to a UPS driver in the cafeteria the other week about this and he said he’d support whatever the union decides but that he personally doesn’t want to strike because he makes “mad overtime” and doesn’t want to lose that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:21
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Meatball Ron is going to be the Kamala Harris of this primary. Had tons of money but nobody wants to actually vote for them and they had to quit before voting actually started So he'll be gifted the Vice Presidency and then assume the highest office in the land with no need for a silly popularity contest when the aged President keels over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:23
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Teamsters say they have reached a tentative deal with UPS to avert a strike. Dude pulled through for the workers. Sure they didn't get the iirc $24 an hour they were fishing for for part timers, but this is still a $6 an hour base pay raise for part timers at least in my area, and full timers getting a $7.50 raise over the course of the contract ain't nothing to sneeze at either. I thought they were arguing for a raise to $40 an hour for full timers but it seems they went further than that over an extended period. The aircon thing is kind of ridiculous, they definitely need it altogether sure, but not retrofitting the fleet with it definitely sucks, those trucks are ovens. Something for the older trucks is better than nothing, at least for the moment, though, and the older vehicles will get cycled out eventually as they wear down, so at least it's a problem that will sort itself out in time. The same pay thing is great, there were guys with different job titles doing the same exact jobs with $5 an hour differences or worse. This cuts out that bullshit. 5 day work week caps is interesting, I wonder if that prevents people from optionally enlisting for Sunday shifts. I know a lot of people who do it for the overtime. MLK day and memorial day off is also a nice bonus. Always happy to have more 4 day work weeks, I'd take a general 4 days a week position in a heartbeat, I never quite recover from the previous week no matter how much I rest over a two day weekend. The camera thing, well I'm always against the insane surveillance poo poo they've been pushing lately, full stop. There are always going to be thieves that join UPS to nick poo poo, no matter the amount of cameras you put up. 99.9% of workers just want to do their daily toil, not sacrifice a career over a $800 iPhone, and not having to worry about having eyes on you at all times is definitely nice. I'm eager to see the full contract. Sean is a no bullshit kinda guy from my experience with him and he personally did me a solid when I had a serious altercation with management at work, straight up came down to my building at 1AM to sort things out on the spot. Dude is legit and I'm glad we booted the fake rear end Hoffa and elected him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
selec posted:That’s a terribly raised dog. If your dog bites seven people you hosed up bad. Depends. He's also still young and it sounds like most of the bites weren't aggressive bites. Biting during play or around food is pretty normal behavior for a young dog and it sounds like there were several documented instances and only one of them involved actually breaking the skin. One of the bite reports is just: quote:Commander “inflicted a ‘friendly soft bite’ on [a Secret Service agent’s] forearm as [he] held the door open,” though “no skin was broken from the bite.” If it isn't aggressive biting, then it could be normal young dog toothiness. That can be trained away, though. He's 1, so it is not too surprising, but if you have been training them from birth, then you can have it trained away at that point. I don't know if they were doing any training at the shelter before he was adopted. I'd guess not. He still should be doing better, but a 1-year old shelter that has been adopted for 9 months being toothy isn't "terribly raised." It sounds like he needs to be screened for anxiety, receive some extra training, and possibly moved out of the stressful environment until he is older. My wife and I foster older, unadoptable, and sick dogs and the vast majority of dogs aren't properly socialized until they are a couple years old. And you absolutely can teach an old dog new tricks because training is effective even for senior dogs who have been in a shelter their entire life and never socialized. Most people are not great dog owners and just expect them to be perfect right out of the gate and that hitting them/spraying them/yelling/negative reinforcement is the only way to condition them to stop. People giving up on training or socializing a dog when it is one year old is depressingly common because they think they have spent months trying to correct the behavior and the dog must be fundamentally broken. Funny things in the article: - He apparently is only aggressive with secret service agents. - Wish there was more detail, but they list events where he "ran at several Secret Service agents" as aggressive events. The head of the Judicial Watch group who FOIA'd the records thinks that the fact he is only aggressive around secret service agents is because he has been trained by Biden to hate the secret service. quote:“These shocking records raise fundamental questions about President Biden and the Secret Service,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:48 on Jul 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:30
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:The camera thing, well I'm always against the insane surveillance poo poo they've been pushing lately, full stop. There are always going to be thieves that join UPS to nick poo poo, no matter the amount of cameras you put up. 99.9% of workers just want to do their daily toil, not sacrifice a career over a $800 iPhone, and not having to worry about having eyes on you at all times is definitely nice. Specifically on this - were they putting cameras in the cab, or in the cargo area? Or both?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:34
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:This doesn't change the actual rule-making itself. It just requires a "for dummies" short-hand version to be made available. I can sue an agency for a rulemaking violation over inadequate summary. Mooseontheloose posted:I think making government more accessible is a good thing, even if you never interact with 99.99999999999999999999999999999% of rule making, you might have to one day and understanding what the rules will do will allow for better input. There's already a summary requirement. The difference is it's codified, and can now be sued over...and it's now a codified limit of 100 words, making it harder to do without being subject to litigation. You are not going to be able to understand most rulemaking based on a 100 word summary. Here is the rulemaking for food traceability under the Food Safety Modernization Act. It's 179 pages in the federal register. The summary is 133 words. With this new law, the summary would be grounds for a suit to force changes to the rulemaking over defects in the notice summary provision, both for being too long, and for not adequately summarizing the rule. There is not a substitute for reading the regulation. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Jul 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:36
|
|
|
It may not even be them being trained to "hate" the secret service. If there's tension between people (like, say, your body guards are of questionable loyalty because the fat orange fucker before you tried to overturn the entire political system through violence and you're not sure which of them are loyal to him despite or because of that) then dogs will absolutely pick up on that tension and act on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:38
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Specifically on this - were they putting cameras in the cab, or in the cargo area? Or both? Probably the cab, but I'm not a driver so I'm not sure. They already have tracking devices in the diads the drivers carry, so having a camera in your face to have even more monitoring on you sucks. They recently installed like 200+ more security cameras, extremely obvious ones sometimes right above people's heads, in my building, and it's pretty stressful just having a camera staring directly at you at all times. They're never used for good, basically, just to "keep an eye on you". As in, I'm sure the camera above my head sees how utterly hosed I get every single night without help, but lol if they're ever going to use that information to effect positive change, know what I mean? Likely the same situation for drivers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:38
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:Specifically on this - were they putting cameras in the cab, or in the cargo area? Or both? According to the union: It is a dual front and rear facing camera in the cab. The front-facing part is to record accidents like a normal dash cam. The rear-facing camera was to see what the driver was doing during the accident (texting, driving normally, etc.) The rear-facing camera is set to only trigger in the result of an accident, but the union wanted guarantees that they would not be continuously recording audio or video with the rear-facing cameras. quote:The cameras can be set to only record when they are triggered by an incident, like swerving or sudden braking. https://www.tdu.org/ups_installs_surveillance_cameras Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Jul 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
Yeah that definitely sounds like a "think of the children" sort of unnecessary privacy invasion. Theft does happen, but it's not nearly as prevalent as they want you to think, and having always on surveillance is only going to be used to go after employees they don't like or don't like the "work ethic" of. Drivers are already pushed quite far especially during the summer and christmastime, you don't need an always-on camera to make sure they're doing their job, it will become incredibly obvious after a short time period whether a driver is pulling shenanigans just through their track record.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:So he'll be gifted the Vice Presidency and then assume the highest office in the land with no need for a silly popularity contest when the aged President keels over.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:54
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:So he'll be gifted the Vice Presidency and then assume the highest office in the land with no need for a silly popularity contest when the aged President keels over. Trump hates Pence and hates that the GOP stooges convinced him to choose who they wanted, not who he wanted. He'll pick Lake or some other nutjob.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I can sue an agency for a rulemaking violation over inadequate summary. So they'll make two summaries, the 100 word summary and an executive summary. This isn't like some onerous thing that will destroy rule making and federal agencies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 21:03
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:So they'll make two summaries, the 100 word summary and an executive summary. This isn't like some onerous thing that will destroy rule making and federal agencies. The "executive summary" you describe may also be grounds for litigation if it's viewed as potentially conflicting with the summary subject to the codified requirement. I have not said this will destroy rulemaking; it will make it more expensive and difficult, particularly for more complex rules, which is the purpose of the law.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 21:10
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I can sue an agency for a rulemaking violation over inadequate summary. You can sue for literally anything. If a judge is willing to throw out the entire process over 120 words being too long, then they were probably willing to find anything else they could use. I have not read this particular legislation, but they generally have clauses that specify the provision does not require them to indemnify any new class of people or imply any new standards. They will generally reference another section of law and say they maintain the standards outlined in that section. If this case is different and the 100 word summary leads to a wave of regulations being thrown out, then I will be very surprised and stand corrected.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 21:13
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:The right never liked Romney in the first place and it always showed. one of the bestworst funny examples of this was 2012, where (secret mormon, he converted to marry his wife ) Beck went winkwink poly mormons(also maybe poly pedo mormons?). I forgot which fundie Beck was backing during the primary,but like a good regressive he fell in line after the RNC nomination
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 21:15
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:You can sue for literally anything. If a judge is willing to throw out the entire process over 120 words being too long, then they were probably willing to find anything else they could use. There is no such clause in the law. This is adding a new requirement directly to the rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. The principal immediate effect is that agencies will slow down and split up rulemaking actions, making them take longer. Also you can afford the time to read this law, it's very short. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Jul 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The "executive summary" you describe may also be grounds for litigation if it's viewed as potentially conflicting with the summary subject to the codified requirement. I have not said this will destroy rulemaking; it will make it more expensive and difficult, particularly for more complex rules, which is the purpose of the law. In practice, most judges are going to be understanding of the fact that a 100-word limit substantially limits how specific and detailed the summary can get. They're not going to treat it as an effective cap on the complexity of the rules themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 22:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 11:54 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:In practice, most judges are going to be understanding of the fact that a 100-word limit substantially limits how specific and detailed the summary can get. They're not going to treat it as an effective cap on the complexity of the rules themselves. This is basically the opposite of reality; the DC circuit (which is were most admin law winds up) is extremely friendly to suits under APA to curtail regulation. The effect has been, and will be via this law, that regulatory agencies slow and break up their rulemaking to attempt to avoid further lawsuits. Again, you should understand this as a bill authored by Republicans with support from Sinema, targeting the administrative rulemaking process; it's not going to be good. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Jul 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2023 22:45
|
|