|
Main Paineframe posted:That said, they do ask a very important question that very few pollsters bother to, though (unsurprisingly) The Intercept chose to leave this one out of their article: It's literally the 2nd paragraph though?
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 06:32 |
|
|
Senate Cum Dump posted:we did not anticipate our calm hitler moderation policies would produce this many hitlers this quickly and we can't handle the volume of reports. alas, our hands are tied and we cannot simply ban the hitlers because it's important to allow all sincere viewpoints, including apologia for an active genocide. Its disappointing how predictable it all is
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 19:51
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:The mechanism they tried to use to forgive $10,000 for each borrower was so goddamn stupid (covid emergency) that the Supreme Court shot it down, and his administration hasn't lifted a finger to try another mechanism. Bernie Sanders had an executive order ready to go for complete forgiveness Day 1 of his administration. The loans are federalized and it is clearly in the power of the president to wipe them out. This is also not accurate. Biden cited the heroes act of 2002 along with the higher education act of 1965 as his basis for forgiving loans. This is almost certainly the exact same legal basis that Bernie would have used to support any potential executive order he may have written as well. The language below is exactly what you're referring to: quote:The Biden administration invoked the HEROES Act as the basis for his executive authority to forgive loans. In particular, the administration utilized language that states that the U.S. Secretary of Education has the authority to "waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial assistance programs under Title IV" of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to ensure that "affected individuals" are not placed in a worse position financially in relation to that financial assistance. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden_v._Nebraska It turns out the court just ignored the plain language there. Who would've thought. The only place where the COVID relief bills factored into this particular legal fight is that the states who sued argued they have standing due to the fact that the American rescue act barred them from taxing forgiven loans for 3 years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 20:24
|
|
|
Kagrenak posted:This is also not accurate. Biden cited the heroes act of 2002 along with the higher education act of 1965 as his basis for forgiving loans. This is almost certainly the exact same legal basis that Bernie would have used to support any potential executive order he may have written as well. The language below is exactly what you're referring to: That part of the HEA pertains to emergencies, which they cited so they could do this stupid HEROES Act play. There is another section of the HEA that says the Education Department can "waive or release" student loans outright. No means testing or emergency power bullshit needed. Just wipe them clean.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 20:51
|
|
|
Kagrenak posted:This is also not accurate. Biden cited the heroes act of 2002 along with the higher education act of 1965 as his basis for forgiving loans. This is almost certainly the exact same legal basis that Bernie would have used to support any potential executive order he may have written as well. The language below is exactly what you're referring to: The argument was that the Secretary had the power to use those HEROES act provisions in response to a national emergency, and the emergency was the pandemic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 20:56
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:That part of the HEA pertains to emergencies, which they cited so they could do this stupid HEROES Act play. The Biden administration used the HEROES Act because: a) the Trump administration had already used the HEROES Act to pause loan payments in 2020 b) the other section of the HEA that you're pointing to has a bunch of mandatory waiting periods and comment periods baked into it. That's why it hasn't come through yet even though Biden invoked that path basically right after the Supreme Court struck down the HEROES Act attempt. Either way, though, the emergency status is irrelevant to the Supreme Court's ruling, which had nothing to do with the definition of "emergency". The Supreme Court struck down loan forgiveness by ruling that the "waive or modify" language was impacted by the major questions doctrine. Basically, Roberts felt that "waive or modify" was not a blank check for the executive to do anything it wanted to the student loan programs. It's hard to see how the Court wouldn't apply the same reasoning to the standard HEA path. Parakeet vs. Phone posted:It's literally the 2nd paragraph though? Sorry, didn't see it since it was in a different portion from the rest of the article's poll numbers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 21:06
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Who controls the DEA? Is this another independent branch of the government? Maybe I'm not up on my constitutional law, I thought it was Biden's DEA. You are not up on your constitutional law. The President does not have the lawful ability to just make administrative agencies do whatever he wants. There is not a secret conspiracy to stop legalization. The primary source of delay in Congress has been the different parts of the cannabis industry fighting each other over the terms of legalization. You are working backward from a desire to blame the administration for...apparently everything.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 21:29
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:b) the other section of the HEA that you're pointing to has a bunch of mandatory waiting periods and comment periods baked into it. Coulda been done with them a year ago if they'd started with it. quote:Either way, though, the emergency status is irrelevant to the Supreme Court's ruling, which had nothing to do with the definition of "emergency". The Supreme Court struck down loan forgiveness by ruling that the "waive or modify" language was impacted by the major questions doctrine. Basically, Roberts felt that "waive or modify" was not a blank check for the executive to do anything it wanted to the student loan programs. It's hard to see how the Court wouldn't apply the same reasoning to the standard HEA path. Probably, but we'll never know at this point. They say they're working on a new plan with a new justification for their $10,000 forgiveness path. It'll be President Trump by the time they actually get their ducks in a row. There are other options if this avenue didn't work: Tell the court to eat your poo poo because they can't enforce anything anyway, set interest rates to 0% and minimum payments to nothing, re-up the payments pause for the rest of your administration. They aren't trying to fight for it because it's not a priority. I mean, you can tell it's not a priority because it's only $10,000 instead of complete forgiveness. quote:You are not up on your constitutional law. The President does not have the lawful ability to just make administrative agencies do whatever he wants. There is not a secret conspiracy to stop legalization. The primary source of delay in Congress has been the different parts of the cannabis industry fighting each other over the terms of legalization. He controls who runs those administrative agencies. If there's some BS paperwork that has to be done, whatever, tell them to do the BS paperwork fast. They didn't start this process until October 2022, nearly halfway through his term. Based on how they're proceeding, he'll probably need another term to finish it. They're clearly not going to decriminalize it. All of this has been just to reschedule it. It's a pathetic administration. All they've got are excuses for half-measures that they can't even deliver. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:12
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Tell the court to eat your poo poo because they can't enforce anything anyway ... If there's some BS paperwork that has to be done, whatever, tell them to do the BS paperwork fast this reasoning is on the same lines as "why doesn't the president just pull the lower gas prices lever" whether or not biden is running decrim as hard as he should, this is like the worst approach possible for playtesting unitary executive
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:28
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:this reasoning is on the same lines as "why doesn't the president just pull the lower gas prices lever" Everything just snaps into place when the GOP has the presidency. Trump wants to ban Muslim immigrants? Done in an executive order, the whole administrative state moves to that purpose immediately. So quickly that people are trapped in airports because they were approved to fly here and disapproved in the duration of the flight. Theoretical Democratic president (not Biden. It would never be Biden) wants to decriminalize marijuana? Ohhhhh, we gotta let the DEA raise its objections and negotiate with the FDA about specific language. 2 years of kicking the can around at least for that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:35
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Everything just snaps into place when the GOP has the presidency. Trump wants to ban Muslim immigrants? Done in an executive order, Ah yes, the muslim ban that famously just happened and remained the standing policy of the government without any repercussions
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:40
|
|
|
(bolding mine)PostNouveau posted:There are other options if this avenue didn't work: Tell the court to eat your poo poo because they can't enforce anything anyway, set interest rates to 0% and minimum payments to nothing, re-up the payments pause for the rest of your administration. They aren't trying to fight for it because it's not a priority. I mean, you can tell it's not a priority because it's only $10,000 instead of complete forgiveness. Really feels like you have an axe to grind here and whatever Biden did, it wouldn't have been good enough. Like, you think he should have directly caused a constitutional crisis over student loans? Really?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:48
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:Really feels like you have an axe to grind here and whatever Biden did, it wouldn't have been good enough. Like, you think he should have directly caused a constitutional crisis over student loans? Really? Absolutely. It's got very positive knock-on effects of defanging this completely illegitimate Supreme Court.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:49
|
|
|
We've had like 8 constitutional crises caused by fascist politicians in the last 25 years. If we're going to just keep having them we might as well have a few that could potentially help regular people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:53
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Everything just snaps into place when the GOP has the presidency. This was the result of the GOP holding onto the Senate between 2010 and 2018. McConnell stalled on just about every judicial appointment Obama made. Then, when Trump won, they sped through appointments and stacked a lot of circuit judges, appellate judges, and SCOTUS judges in their favor. That’s why it’s an uphill battle when a Democrat wants to do something, but easy as pie for a Republican.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:54
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:this reasoning is on the same lines as "why doesn't the president just pull the lower gas prices lever" The president did pull the lower gas prices lever. It was releasing oil from the strategic petroleum reserve.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:57
|
|
|
volts5000 posted:This was the result of the GOP holding onto the Senate between 2010 and 2018. McConnell stalled on just about every judicial appointment Obama made. Then, when Trump won, they sped through appointments and stacked a lot of circuit judges, appellate judges, and SCOTUS judges in their favor. Except for the Muslim ban that was his example of Trump getting everything he wanted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 22:57
|
|
|
volts5000 posted:This was the result of the GOP holding onto the Senate between 2010 and 2018. McConnell stalled on just about every judicial appointment Obama made. Then, when Trump won, they sped through appointments and stacked a lot of circuit judges, appellate judges, and SCOTUS judges in their favor. It's true, the Democratic Party is pathetic and unable to strategically stack courts in its favor. But my point is that the administrative state immediately jumps in line with GOP orders. They don't dither around and have the lawyers trade memos for 18 months. It gets done or the bureaucrats who aren't doing it get shitcanned and replaced with ones who will.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:01
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Everything just snaps into place when the GOP has the presidency. Everything* just snapped into place for Trump * 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:04
|
|
|
volts5000 posted:This was the result of the GOP holding onto the Senate between 2010 and 2018. McConnell stalled on just about every judicial appointment Obama made. Then, when Trump won, they sped through appointments and stacked a lot of circuit judges, appellate judges, and SCOTUS judges in their favor. The GOP only had the Senate between 2015 and 2021. e: gah, if I'm going to be pedantic about dates I should probably get the dates right! Majorian fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Apr 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:05
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Everything just snaps into place when the GOP has the presidency. Trump wants to ban Muslim immigrants? Done in an executive order, the whole administrative state moves to that purpose immediately. So quickly that people are trapped in airports because they were approved to fly here and disapproved in the duration of the flight. It was quickly overturned by the courts, as were the next couple attempts, and what he was able to get through in the end was pretty compromised from the initial goal. So it caused a bunch of chaos and was overturned. I'm not sure how this shows everything just snapping into place. https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-rights/appeals-court-declares-third-muslim-ban-unconstitutional
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:06
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:It was quickly overturned by the courts, as were the next couple attempts, and what he was able to get through in the end was pretty compromised from the initial goal. I'm talking about the administrative state here. You can just order them around. They'll jump right to. With a lot of gusto apparently. And the Supreme Court did wind up upholding Trump's third executive order, which permanently (not for just 90 days like the original) had bans on all the original nations minus Sudan and plus North Korea and Chad. Doesn't seem compromised from the initial goal. Especially since his actual goal there wasn't a specific policy, but rather was "do something racist so my racist constituents will like me more". PostNouveau fucked around with this message at 23:20 on Apr 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:12
|
|
|
its schrodinger's loan forgiveness: Biden is TOTALLY working on a plan to forgive student loans, and he just needs more TIME to work out the details. Why hasn't he done it yet? Well you see he is powerless to forgive student loans. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:18
|
|
|
Edge & Christian posted:I do understand that thirty years ago he co-authored a very bad bill, but there is evidence from about thirty years more recently that his administration may have softened/reversed that stance. There is plenty of time for him to do a double-switch and adopt Duterte's drug policy in time for the general election, but I do not get the feeling that is where the administration is headed. At worst the Biden Administration seems legalization-curious. The half steps he's taken on weed legalization make me think he's getting re-elected-curious too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:23
|
|
|
Aztec Galactus posted:its schrodinger's loan forgiveness: Biden is TOTALLY working on a plan to forgive student loans, and he just needs more TIME to work out the details. Why hasn't he done it yet? Well you see he is powerless to forgive student loans. No no no. That would be Heisenberg Loan Forgiveness. When he has the energy, he doesn't have the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:26
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:All I ever see on this is no one knows what will happen if it gets struck down. I'm right here telling you that SAVE is just REPAYE with new terms. If they rule that Biden can't change the terms of REPAYE, it just goes back to REPAYE, which is an actual law. quote:It's a pathetic administration. All they've got are excuses for half-measures that they can't even deliver. I did give you ways they've delivered for me, which suddenly weren't good enough for you once you were told Biden did them and not Bush. Xombie fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Apr 2, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:41
|
|
|
Aztec Galactus posted:its schrodinger's loan forgiveness: Biden is TOTALLY working on a plan to forgive student loans, and he just needs more TIME to work out the details. Why hasn't he done it yet? Well you see he is powerless to forgive student loans. Biden is not working on a plan to forgive all student debt (and nobody claims he is) and has already done multiple rounds of debt forgiveness, the argument here is over whether he's a useless neoliberal for using one procedural pathway that got struck down by Republican judges on imaginary grounds instead of using a different, unnamed pathway that totally wouldn't have been struck down by Republican judges on imaginary grounds
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:48
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:No no no. That would be Heisenberg Loan Forgiveness. When he has the energy, he doesn't have the time. and Schrödinger’s loan forgiveness is when your loans are simultaneously forgiven and not forgiven and will remain in this state until you check your mail
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2024 23:49
|
|
|
My understanding is that the weed rescheduling process is going at pretty much the normal speed of the administrative state. Maybe a bit slower because the DEA is cranky about literally everyone else in the government telling them to reschedule weed, but they're still on the high end of the regular pre-public-comment window.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:05
|
|
|
With Florida being gouged and chuded out of existence, are there any states that are warm, cheapish, and not chock full of republicans New Mexico, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:25
|
|
|
Nevada
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:33
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:With Florida being gouged and chuded out of existence, are there any states that are warm, cheapish, and not chock full of republicans Northern New Mexico is great. Dry, hot weather in the summer, winter it snows. Great activities in the fall. Below average work prospects though if not into hospitality or film. Actually a criminally underrated state.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:37
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:With Florida being gouged and chuded out of existence, are there any states that are warm, cheapish, and not chock full of republicans another vote for puerto rico statehood i see
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:38
|
|
|
Warmer climate is coming to a state near you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:45
|
|
|
Goatse James Bond posted:My understanding is that the weed rescheduling process is going at pretty much the normal speed of the administrative state. Maybe a bit slower because the DEA is cranky about literally everyone else in the government telling them to reschedule weed, but they're still on the high end of the regular pre-public-comment window. Quoting you cause of the topic, not asking you specifically. Is there anything being done about people driving and smoking weed at the state level? I'm in a newly legal state now and I take public transit, so I walk along the streets or wait at bus stops next to the streets every single day. There has literally never been a single day where no car has driven past me smelling dank af. This isn't hyperbole: I smell at least 1 car driving past me every single day smelling like they just lit up. I'm all for legalization but I seriously don't understand why people feel like it's acceptable to smoke and drive?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:52
|
|
|
same reason people still drink and drive
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 01:54
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:same reason people still drink and drive Cause it makes me look cool? Also the law here is that you can't have weed accessible to you while driving. So it has to be in the trunk or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:05
|
|
|
People also feel it's acceptable to be tired and drive and studies repeatedly show that can be worse than being drunk and driving. Basically cars are death machines
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:11
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:I'm talking about the administrative state here. You can just order them around. They'll jump right to. With a lot of gusto apparently. The administrative state won't follow an order that's been declared unconstitutional by the courts. That's why Trump had to try three times to get his Muslim ban. If he could have just ignored the court and charged ahead anyway, why wouldn't he have just done that the first time, instead of taking the whole thing back to the drawing board twice in hopes of coming up with something that'd pass the court's scrutiny? Aztec Galactus posted:its schrodinger's loan forgiveness: Biden is TOTALLY working on a plan to forgive student loans, and he just needs more TIME to work out the details. Why hasn't he done it yet? Well you see he is powerless to forgive student loans. Biden started the legally required negotiated rulemaking process to forgive the loans in summer 2023. You can read more about the negotiated rulemaking process, which is mandatory under the Higher Education Act of 1965, at this helpful page from the Department of Education. If you'd like to see how this particular negotiated rulemaking process is going, the records are all public and can be found here. While that page doesn't mention any timeline, it's typical for the negotiated rulemaking process to take up to a year. Considering the number of stakeholders who loudly oppose what Biden is doing, as well as the considerable legal scrutiny this process is under, I wouldn't expect a final outcome before this summer, and I wouldn't be surprised if it drags on into fall. And of course, the moment the final rule is issued, it's going to face a court challenge that will almost certainly slap an instant injunction on it. But none of that is Biden's fault! If anything, the fault here lies with Congress.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 06:32 |
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Quoting you cause of the topic, not asking you specifically. In terms of law and enforcement, it'll be state dependent. People feel it's acceptable because they believe cannabis is harmless, and via the same rationalizations that would lead others to drink and drive.
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2024 02:22
|
|