Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Seems crazy that government agencies like the EPA are lead by POTUS appointees. Too much power I say.
If we disconnected executive office from government agencies, they would be free to set rules to achieve the goals which they are tasked with. Of course, it would take cooperation between agencies, since environmental agencies would not sufficiently consider economics, and vice versa. At least this way it isn't political suicide, since it wouldn't be a particular politician raising fuel taxes, but a governmental agency.
As a tangent, why does POTUS get to appoint supreme court justices for life? That job should be just like any other, where we either elect them, or they are internally promoted to the position.
|
The appointment issue might require a constitutional amendment,or a Supreme Court policy reversal.Whoops!
Policy has been pretty much ruled by economists since 1957,so they're probably already well represented.It's why we risk losing the planet.
They're more afraid of stranded investments than the loss of the biosphere.
There might be a case for the House and Senate being required to use a rigorous scientific metric in the confirmation process for POTUS nominees.It wouldn't matter how lame the president or their nominees were,Congress simply wouldn't be able to install the minion/sychophant/boot-lickers without an extreme portfolio of real qualifications.Not just whether or not they sexually molested someone when they were drunk.