Congress writes the law, then the EPA supports local and state agencies like the DEP in defining processes to uphold it. If the EPA doesn’t have the authority, then it’s likely the state programs don’t either. It would be up to the governor to empower the DEP or other local environmental enforcement agencies to have more authority than the EPA.
disguy_ovahea
Please explain how a minority of abstainers will positively influence candidates.
I can easily explain how the exact opposite occurs in one sentence.
Conventions receive detailed reports on active registered voters and tailor their next candidate to capture more of that audience.
Just think of all the dropped suits against 3M, Boeing, the Sacklers, and Big Oil, when Project 2025’s plan for Schedule F employees comes to fruition.
I’m guessing you still think the silence of your abstention will “make your voice heard,” even after witnessing all the damage it caused in 2016?
That’s exactly what they’re counting on. The same goes for 3M and Boeing.
It’s both. Sort of an election dependent Schrödinger’s cat. The settlement amount was far too low in relation to the damage caused and the profits earned, so the immunity from future settlements was absurd. However, if Trump wins in the fall, there’s no way his new Project 2025 Schedule F hires will bring appropriate charges against a business doing business.
We’ve already spent $52B in settlement funds on local police departments and cash payouts. Without a federal mandate for investment in rehabilitation programs, it’ll just end up spent the same anyway.
Oh, I completely agree that they made the right decision. My point is that the ruling is a double-edged sword if Trump wins in the fall.
They did, however, a new case won’t be brought and heard before the next presidency. Project 2025’s Schedule F hires won’t be prosecuting businesses doing business. Yet another reason to vote in November.
This is the result of protesting an election by abstention.
Fuck. Well, this is what we get for thinking we can change the government with abstention.
Me neither. I’m just repeating what attorneys and judges have publicly said on the matter. We’ll see when the time comes.