U.S. Politics Independance Day edition

[Gorn]

12 hours ago, Fez said:

Capitol Police put out a press release a couple days ago about steps they're taking to ensure another Jan. 6 never happens. https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/after-attack-future-us-capitol-police

I haven't seen much coverage of it, until today when some actual libertarians started freaking out about one provision in particular:

Having Capitol Police expand from being an agency that just physically protects the Capitol grounds to be an agency with its own (potentially sprawling) investigative functions seems to be setting some hair on fire.

Personally, given the past difficulties with information sharing between agencies, and the ongoing threat to democracy that is occurring, I'm fine with this activity.

It's funny how it's become necessary to emphasize this. I don't think any other ideology has such a gap between the number of people who claim to adhere to it, and the number of people who adhere to it in reality.

Maybe organized religion, especially parts about helping the poor and being actually pro-life.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Have to say I'm not that crazy about new powers to the police state... not necessarily that this Capitol Police expansion is a bad thing on its own, but more the potential for more things to be labelled domestic terrorism.

We've already seen a judge use a "domestic terrorism enhancement" to add time to the sentences of two women who protested the DAPL.  We should have learned our lesson about going down that road with the Patriot Act.  

[Wilbur]

1 hour ago, larrytheimp said:

..."We should have learned our lesson...with the Patriot Act."

This needs to be chiseled into the marble, in the maximum font size possible, of several Washington DC monuments.

[Martell Spy]

Education Department urges Biden to extend student loan relief
Some White House advisers worry that continuing an emergency pandemic relief program might undercut the administration’s messaging about the economic recovery.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/09/student-loan-relief-extension-498942

Quote

 

Education Department officials are recommending that the White House once again extend the pause on federal student loan payments, according to people familiar with the internal discussions, putting more pressure on the Biden administration ahead of a fall deadline.

Those administration voices join a growing chorus of top congressional Democrats and advocacy groups pushing the White House to continue pandemic benefits for more than 40 million student loan borrowers.

The White House has not yet made a final decision on how and when to restart federal student loan payments, which have been frozen since March 2020. But Education Department officials have suggested to the White House that the administration extend loan relief one final time, through the end of January 2022, the sources said.

Some White House advisers support further extending the relief to give the Education Department, which is charged with managing the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio, more time to come up with a plan to ease borrowers back into repayment, according to people familiar with the discussions. But other advisers worry that continuing an emergency pandemic relief program into 2022 could undercut the administration’s messaging about the strength of the economic recovery.

 

 

[Larry of the Lawn]

12 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Education Department urges Biden to extend student loan relief
Some White House advisers worry that continuing an emergency pandemic relief program might undercut the administration’s messaging about the economic recovery.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/07/09/student-loan-relief-extension-498942

 

A great solution here would be eliminating all student loan debt - difficult to see how that wouldn't be a major boon for the economy at large.

[Martell Spy]

17 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

A great solution here would be eliminating all student loan debt - difficult to see how that wouldn't be a major boon for the economy at large.

I agree, but if these WH advisers are arguing over extending the pause in payments, what do you think they are saying about forgiveness?

[Larry of the Lawn]

Just now, Martell Spy said:

I agree, but if these WH advisers are arguing over extending the pause in payments, what do you think they are saying about forgiveness?

I'm assuming it's a nonstarter and was never even considered an option by this administration.

[argonak]

38 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

A great solution here would be eliminating all student loan debt - difficult to see how that wouldn't be a major boon for the economy at large.

Debt is the foundation of our economy though.  Our money is literally built on it.  I'm not against it in theory, but I think we need to get some research done on it first.  And its going to take a lot of negotiation to find some moderate point of view people can agree on.   Its so big it could have some serious side effects.  It would need to come along with a huge radical revision of our education system (which is absolutely needed).   It is not going to ever be a popular policy as long as there is a perception that people go out and get master's degrees in basket weaving and then whine about working at Starbucks.  

I'd prefer a system of competitive entry for free education in our higher institutions, with a budget that is based on the number of quality students they have and graduate.  A first step would be to cut out all the damn sports which have been so lucrative and changed the philosophical direction of so many schools.  Keep the sports but have them be a non-profit that isn't directly connected to the school's bottom line.

[Zorral]

I would like to see that, but that will happen never, especially as the Big Schools are also now about being real estate moghuls as much as dominating sports franchises. Colleges really aren't at all about education and haven't been for a very long time now.  The students are the last participants in this wide-ranging financial enterprise who want to make it about education -- with some exceptions of course, brilliant, wonderful exceptions.

 

 

[Zorral]

"Biden fires top official at Social Security Administration after he refuses to resign"

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/09/politics/social-security-commissioner-fired-by-biden/index.html

 

Quote

 

. . . . Biden had asked for the top two officials at the Social Security Administration to submit their resignations, the White House official told CNN, but only Saul refused. Deputy Commissioner David Black agreed to submit his resignation, the official said, and it was accepted.

"Since taking office, Commissioner Saul has undermined and politicized Social Security disability benefits, terminated the agency's telework policy that was utilized by up to 25 percent of the agency's workforce, not repaired SSA's relationships with relevant Federal employee unions including in the context of COVID-19 workplace safety planning, reduced due process protections for benefits appeals hearings, and taken other actions that run contrary to the mission of the agency and the President's policy agenda," the White House official said. . . . 

 

Considering how many of these appointees Biden's had to fire when they refused to resign, it looks as though they too believe in the return of the king. Especially as the guy says he can't be fired.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/andrew-saul-social-security-/2021/07/09/c18a34fa-df99-11eb-a501-0e69b5d012e5_story.html

Quote

. . . .But Saul said in an interview Friday afternoon that he would not leave his post, challenging the legality of the White House move to oust him. As the head of an independent agency whose leadership does not normally change with a new administration, Saul’s six-year term was supposed to last until January 2025. The White House said a recent Supreme Court ruling gives the president power to replace him. . . .

He really was a nightmare, abusing cruelly the very people the agency was created to help. A lot more details of this in the WaPo story.

 

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Considering how many of these appointees Biden's had to fire when they refused to resign, it looks as though they too believe in the return of the king.

I don't think refusal to resign is indicative that these appointees believe in the reinstatement bullshit.  The fact is it is out of the ordinary for a president to fire the head of an independent agency.  Then again, so too is someone in such a position refusing to resign when asked by the president.  Which really just speaks to how grossly unqualified and out of the ordinary Trump's appointees were.

[Zorral]

This particular guy was appointed because prior to that he did everything he could to get SS benefits, particularly for union people, cut or gotten rid of, just for starters.  He also believes unions should not be legal.

How can we have somebody like that in any good faith running a very large part of the SS Agency, that oversees benefits to those with disabilities, including veterans and so many others?  He had to be fired.  Also, no experience.  He made his money in ... underwear manufacture.  So ya, he really hated the idea of benefits going for disabled people -- those damaged on a job -- and of course he hated labor unions and those who struggle to get  living wage paid to labor.

[DMC]

I'm aware of all that.  I'm just saying I don't think him refusing to resign indicates he thinks Trump is actually going to be reinstated.

[DireWolfSpirit]

Spoiler

It's a shame it takes 6 months to cut off a head in DC.

Maybe Biden needs to add Lucy Liu to his administration to speed things along?

Anymore Trumpsters hiding under rocks?

The only appropriate way to deal with a Trump appointee.

 

The only appropriate way to deal with a Trump appointee.

[TrueMetis]

16 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Have to say I'm not that crazy about new powers to the police state... not necessarily that this Capitol Police expansion is a bad thing on its own, but more the potential for more things to be labelled domestic terrorism.

We've already seen a judge use a "domestic terrorism enhancement" to add time to the sentences of two women who protested the DAPL.  We should have learned our lesson about going down that road with the Patriot Act.  

Yeah, this is like how you have multiple agencies for immigration with a lot of overlap in what they do. Seems like a lot of this is definitely something the FBI could handle and would be a much better use of it resources than say, monitoring black activists, instead of expanding a different group to do it.

[DMC]

I dunno, the courts have the Marshals and the presidency has the Secret Service (both of which long preceded the FBI, btw).  It doesn't seem too unreasonable for Congress to have/expand its own protective and investigative specialized agency.  Especially after the Capitol and its members were directly attacked and threatened.  Given the climate with an escalating amount and danger of threats to MCs, such an expansion seems reasonable to me.  I suppose you could just create another branch within the feebs, but given the track record of that regarding both inter and intra-agency coordination I definitely wouldn't advise it.

Also, the Patriot Act is a confused and facile comparison.  First and foremost, the Patriot Act did not create any new agencies nor expand their personnel/capacity, it expanded the scope of what many if not most federal (LEO) agencies were allowed to do.  A better example from the era, I suppose, would be the Homeland Security Act passed a year later.  Second, a large part of the criticism of the Act is that it was passed during the post 9/11 fervor - it became law a mere 45 days later.  I dare say the fervor following 1/6 is much less muted, not to mention it's been, ya know, a lot more than 45 days.  Hell, I'd say we could use more fervor in response to 1/6, not less - including, importantly, ensuring the safety of members of Congress.  Perhaps even from each other.

[Larry of the Lawn]

2 hours ago, DMC said:

I dunno, the courts have the Marshals and the presidency has the Secret Service (both of which long preceded the FBI, btw).  It doesn't seem too unreasonable for Congress to have/expand its own protective and investigative specialized agency.  Especially after the Capitol and its members were directly attacked and threatened.  Given the climate with an escalating amount and danger of threats to MCs, such an expansion seems reasonable to me.  I suppose you could just create another branch within the feebs, but given the track record of that regarding both inter and intra-agency coordination I definitely wouldn't advise it.

Also, the Patriot Act is a confused and facile comparison.  First and foremost, the Patriot Act did not create any new agencies nor expand their personnel/capacity, it expanded the scope of what many if not most federal (LEO) agencies were allowed to do.  A better example from the era, I suppose, would be the Homeland Security Act passed a year later.  Second, a large part of the criticism of the Act is that it was passed during the post 9/11 fervor - it became law a mere 45 days later.  I dare say the fervor following 1/6 is much less muted, not to mention it's been, ya know, a lot more than 45 days.  Hell, I'd say we could use more fervor in response to 1/6, not less - including, importantly, ensuring the safety of members of Congress.  Perhaps even from each other.

I wasn't bringing up the Patriot Act as some bureaucratic analog to the expansion of the Capitol Police.  

My concern is Biden's desire to pass some kind of domestic terrorism legislation.  I'm not sure why we need sentencing enhancements beyond the crimes themselves, and I'd be surprised if there wasn't some kind of expansion of surveillance powers tucked away in there.  

I'm also not sure what the difference it makes in how long after an event legislation is passed if the legislation sucks either way.  

eta: like I said, the Capitol Police expansion on its own probably not much of a thing.  It's everything else they're chattering about.  

[DMC]

2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

eta: like I said, the Capitol Police expansion on its own probably not much of a thing.  It's everything else they're chattering about. 

Ok.  I certainly agree about the dangers of making any domestic terrorism version of the Patriot Act (which was already sufficiently domestic).  It's just, that's not what the link Fez brought up was talking about.

[Zorral]

Part of the problem with yet another one of these agencies being created is there already so very many of them -- including those the public doesn't know about -- that -- not even the C.I.A. knows all of them, including some of its own.  I read that in some report quite a long time ago, during the bushwa2 era, but don't recall where or when.  So that might not be true?  Again though, that's the point.  We, the public, who fund these things, who are investigated and surveilled and even arrested by these things, do not know.

[Larry of the Lawn]

17 minutes ago, DMC said:

Ok.  I certainly agree about the dangers of making any domestic terrorism version of the Patriot Act (which was already sufficiently domestic).  It's just, that's not what the link Fez brought up was talking about.

Yeah, I get that, but new domestic terrorism legislation is quite literally being discussed by the administration as a response to Jan 6th.  And pivoting the Capitol Police towards an intelligence-based protective agency doesn't exactly do much to convince me I'm just being paranoid.     

If it's not sufficiently relevant to the link, well, I don't really care.

eta: It's not like DHS never abused it's powers after its creation.  Or that other new agencies with expanded powers ICE cough ICE turned out to be nothing to be concerned about.