174
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

While I do not support wall construction, I actually don't mind that he allowed the project to move forward. It shows respect for the office and for the voters of the previous administration. While he won't get much credit for it, being the only adult in a room is just a pretty tough gig, I personally respect it.

That said, I do not agree with waiving federal regulations to make it happen. It's not like this is some magic fix that is sure to work or something, its not worth cutting through red tape.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 4 points 1 year ago

Trump signed into law in 2019. Allowing the White House to waive the environmental rules. Do I wish he would have tied up in red tape yes. But this money and the waiver were from the previous Administration. Biden has been in office for three years. Seems to me that makes him look less than enthusiastic about the wall.

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Then he could have un-waived them, assuming it was done via executive order. Simply allowing the regulations to protect the things they are supposed to protect, like the environment.

[-] deur@feddit.nl 4 points 1 year ago

Have you considered the fact that your simple solution likely is based on a simple reality that only exists in your head?

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Executive orders actually are that simple. If it was done with one, it can be undone with one.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

I said it was a law, not an executive order.

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Do you happen to remember the laws name? My recollection is it was all executive orders.

[-] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

I think it is the https://federalregister.gov/d/2023-22176 and update to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. The Executive Order was to bypass the The Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act and Endangered Species Acts

[-] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

The funds appropriated for it are not a simple waive away from the magic "executive" order. You aren't allowed to screw with congress approved stuff that easily.

this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
174 points (95.8% liked)

politics

19144 readers
1457 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS