Oh boy, Doctor Chaps is back! We've so missed his weekly declarations of demonic possession now that he got a big boy job in the Colorado legislature. You might remember the self-proclaimed Doctor Chaps (his words!) as the teevee preacher man who believes that Barack Obama is literally possessed by demons.
Thing is, the legislature can be as general or as specific as they like, when they make the laws. They can give an agency the power to "curb pollution" in general, or they can specify how many ppm of arsenic they're cool with. This is all about conservatards' hatred of regulations, period. If Toxocrap Industries wants to dump arsenic in a river, these assholes want to be in a position to ask "how much would you like to dump?" and legislate accordingly. Because freedumbs.
Pretty amazing that a Columbia law professor could be so dismissive (or ignorant maybe, but more likely dismissive) of the enormous volume of SCOTUS precedent establishing the constitutionality and legality of the general structure of administrative law - in particular, the fact that it's based almost entirely on Congressional delegation to the Executive to make such rules.
In fact, in <em>INS v. Chadha</em>, SCOTUS found that it&#039;s legislative vetoes that are unconstitutional, and this is exactly what el Gordo appears to be trying to enact (obviously, state vs Federal yadda yadda).
<blockquote>Hamburger Helper does have at least something of a point. There is a lot of regulatory law that is left up to the regulatory agencies to set, on the thinking that maybe pig ball cutters are not the most qualified people to be setting regulatory policy, but rather, it should be the people who, I don&rsquo;t know, actually have to enforce this stuff. Now while the legality of such regulations is a little questionable,...</blockquote> You would think that the legislative branch, at least on the Federal level, would have looked into this issue <a href="http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Administrative_Procedure_Act" target="_blank">decades ago</a> and then passed legislation that provided a clear legal basis for such authority and also outlined the process that agencies of the Executive branch would need to follow to issue, enforce, codify and subject to judicial review such regulations.
Um, OK, but that&#039;s a whole lot of legalese to digest. If only there was a guide that outlined all of this in plain language that interested citizens could consult.
Something, say, like <a href="http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/crs\/misc\/RL32240.pdf" target="_blank">this.</a>
OK fine, but that all just applies to the Federal government. What about the regulations issued by state governments, which is what Colorado Rep. Klingenschmitt is concerned about, huh? What about <a href="http:\/\/www.sos.state.co.us\/pubs\/CCR\/CCRHome.html" target="_blank">Colorado state regulations?</a>
So yes, this whole subject is quite murky indeed and information about it that could be <a href="https:\/\/www.google.com\/\?gws_rd=ssl" target="_blank">located by ordinary citizens</a> (or even by Colorado state representatives) is <a href="http:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/wex\/administrative_law" target="_blank">all but nonexistent.</a>
Hamburger Helper is pretty much a bunch of salt so it should work for rat dicks too.
If Phillip is a Hamburger, then Gordon is a Pink Slime.
Thing is, the legislature can be as general or as specific as they like, when they make the laws. They can give an agency the power to &quot;curb pollution&quot; in general, or they can specify how many ppm of arsenic they&#039;re cool with. This is all about conservatards&#039; hatred of regulations, period. If Toxocrap Industries wants to dump arsenic in a river, these assholes want to be in a position to ask &quot;how much would you like to dump?&quot; and legislate accordingly. Because freedumbs.
Leather chaps or chapped lips?
Well, a sammich is only a sammich, but a Manwich is a meal!
First thing, we kill all the regulators. Then we review their regulation until it isn&#039;t regular to regulate anything. Then, ???
Step four: PROFIT!!!
This is government by underpants gnomes at its very best.
AOT,K
ew
Pretty amazing that a Columbia law professor could be so dismissive (or ignorant maybe, but more likely dismissive) of the enormous volume of SCOTUS precedent establishing the constitutionality and legality of the general structure of administrative law - in particular, the fact that it&#039;s based almost entirely on Congressional delegation to the Executive to make such rules.
In fact, in <em>INS v. Chadha</em>, SCOTUS found that it&#039;s legislative vetoes that are unconstitutional, and this is exactly what el Gordo appears to be trying to enact (obviously, state vs Federal yadda yadda).
If only the toxic detritus from Northrup Grumman clogged instead of spreading in an ever-growing groudwater plume...
Worse than you could ever imagine:
Chapped udders
<blockquote>Hamburger Helper does have at least something of a point. There is a lot of regulatory law that is left up to the regulatory agencies to set, on the thinking that maybe pig ball cutters are not the most qualified people to be setting regulatory policy, but rather, it should be the people who, I don&rsquo;t know, actually have to enforce this stuff. Now while the legality of such regulations is a little questionable,...</blockquote> You would think that the legislative branch, at least on the Federal level, would have looked into this issue <a href="http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Administrative_Procedure_Act" target="_blank">decades ago</a> and then passed legislation that provided a clear legal basis for such authority and also outlined the process that agencies of the Executive branch would need to follow to issue, enforce, codify and subject to judicial review such regulations.
<a href="http:\/\/www.justice.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/jmd\/legacy\/2014\/05\/01\/act-pl79-404.pdf" target="_blank">Oh, wait...</a>
Um, OK, but that&#039;s a whole lot of legalese to digest. If only there was a guide that outlined all of this in plain language that interested citizens could consult.
Something, say, like <a href="http:\/\/www.fas.org\/sgp\/crs\/misc\/RL32240.pdf" target="_blank">this.</a>
OK fine, but that all just applies to the Federal government. What about the regulations issued by state governments, which is what Colorado Rep. Klingenschmitt is concerned about, huh? What about <a href="http:\/\/www.sos.state.co.us\/pubs\/CCR\/CCRHome.html" target="_blank">Colorado state regulations?</a>
So yes, this whole subject is quite murky indeed and information about it that could be <a href="https:\/\/www.google.com\/\?gws_rd=ssl" target="_blank">located by ordinary citizens</a> (or even by Colorado state representatives) is <a href="http:\/\/www.law.cornell.edu\/wex\/administrative_law" target="_blank">all but nonexistent.</a>