Trump's Budget to Cut NEA, PBS, NPR

Started by Solar, March 16, 2017, 05:57:25 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

supsalemgr

Quote from: Solar on March 18, 2017, 10:46:31 AM
Same here.
I was one of his most ardent detractors, now I find myself on the other side of the fence most times.

He is a pleasant surprise so far. It is too bad he not only has to fight Pelosi and Schummer, but Ryan and McConnell also.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

Solar

Quote from: supsalemgr on March 18, 2017, 11:14:00 AM
He is a pleasant surprise so far. It is too bad he not only has to fight Pelosi and Schummer, but Ryan and McConnell also.
Yep, that's the problem, he has leftists in both party's to deal with. I hope to Hell people are finally waking up to the fact that the GOP is nothing more than an extension of the dim party.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

stewball

The libs are shittin' pineapples over everything Trump is doing. It just breaks my heart to see so much lib misery out there.   Not !

Thinker

Trump seems to pretty much created a problem.  While he is going gangbusters trying to accomplish everything he said he was going to accomplish.  It highlights all the other politicians, Federal, State and City that have made promises over the years (typically during election years) and accomplished nothing.  We pretty much have nothing but a bunch of bull-shitters in elected offices.

walkstall

Quote from: Thinker on March 18, 2017, 07:32:59 PM
Trump seems to pretty much created a problem.  While he is going gangbusters trying to accomplish everything he said he was going to accomplish.  It highlights all the other politicians, Federal, State and City that have made promises over the years (typically during election years) and accomplished nothing.  We pretty much have nothing but a bunch of bull-shitters in elected offices.

I have been saying that for over 85+ years!
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

quiller

Quote from: supsalemgr on March 18, 2017, 08:14:39 AM
This conversation is a perfect example of why cutting anything in the federal government is so difficult. Our good friend, Quiller, is opposed to the EPA cuts in his area. This is the normal NIMB (not in my backyard) response.

PAY ATTENTION.

The Great Lakes comprises one-fifth of this entire planet's fresh water supply. It is VITAL that invasive species be kept out. It is vital to international trade along the Ste. Lawrence that we honor our commitments to Canada.

This is way bigger than the absolute brain-dead moron who wants to cut off Meals on Wheels.

quiller

Quote from: mdgiles on March 18, 2017, 08:25:36 AM
So keeping the Great Lakes clean requires the EPA, governmental authority over every backyard pond in the USA - right?

Conflate subjects much there? The five Great Lakes are scarcely backyard ponds.

I will not back down that the Great Lakes MUST be protected by federal authority. The EPA is the arm of that authority (like it or not, court decisions or not). Smaller is better? Sure. But we have treaties and we also have common sense in place.

It's like that gross image of a cute kitten staring down into a toilet bowl. Caption: "You mean they take a lovely bowl of fresh water and they shit in it?"

They will if we don't keep people from crapping in it.

Solar

The laws in place prior to the EPA gave the Federal govt the power to regulate under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution,
known as the 10th Amendment/Commerce Clause.
We don't need a redundant bureaucracy interfering via another overreaching entity writing law it was not charged to do, usurping Congress' power as well as the court's job as a final arbiter.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

supsalemgr

Quote from: quiller on March 19, 2017, 03:22:33 AM
PAY ATTENTION.

The Great Lakes comprises one-fifth of this entire planet's fresh water supply. It is VITAL that invasive species be kept out. It is vital to international trade along the Ste. Lawrence that we honor our commitments to Canada.

This is way bigger than the absolute brain-dead moron who wants to cut off Meals on Wheels.

I believe you misunderstood my post. I was not commenting on the issue or your position. I was just using this ans an example of why cutting any government program is a challenge.
"If you can't run with the big dawgs, stay on the porch!"

quiller

Quote from: supsalemgr on March 19, 2017, 08:52:05 AM
I believe you misunderstood my post. I was not commenting on the issue or your position. I was just using this ans an example of why cutting any government program is a challenge.

Talk about throwing the Trigger Switch! It's also Canada's and every other U.S. state aside from Michigan, all the way out to the Atlantic. But who's counting?

I was trying to recall, today, just how many times I agree with the State of Illinois on absolutely ANYTHING and this is such a case. The invasive species is only one facet. Commerce, particularly affected by the aging Soo Locks controlling traffic, is another hot button for this entire region.

Every U.S. state doing any shipping on the Great Lakes or on the Ste. Lawrence knows how vital this is. Less visible is Coast Guard funding which Trump also proposes to cut to near-oblivion levels. (Say the secret word, "ONE icebreaker!" and win a brutal slash in operating money!)

Takeaway question, set say 8 years from now. Think hard before answering.

So Trump has built his wall but also has reduced the Coast Guard to prevent people from sailing around it. How's that going to work out --- besides a lot more use of the term "wetback"?

mdgiles

Quote from: quiller on March 19, 2017, 03:28:40 AM
Conflate subjects much there? The five Great Lakes are scarcely backyard ponds.

I will not back down that the Great Lakes MUST be protected by federal authority. The EPA is the arm of that authority (like it or not, court decisions or not). Smaller is better? Sure. But we have treaties and we also have common sense in place.

It's like that gross image of a cute kitten staring down into a toilet bowl. Caption: "You mean they take a lovely bowl of fresh water and they shit in it?"

They will if we don't keep people from crapping in it.
You don't understand. Why does doing the few necessary actions these agencies perform, require ongoing governmental overreach? And how is pointing out these few necessary actions serve as an excuse for everything else they do?
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

zewazir

Quote from: quiller on March 19, 2017, 03:28:40 AM
Conflate subjects much there? The five Great Lakes are scarcely backyard ponds.

I will not back down that the Great Lakes MUST be protected by federal authority. The EPA is the arm of that authority (like it or not, court decisions or not). Smaller is better? Sure. But we have treaties and we also have common sense in place.

It's like that gross image of a cute kitten staring down into a toilet bowl. Caption: "You mean they take a lovely bowl of fresh water and they shit in it?"

They will if we don't keep people from crapping in it.
First point: the comment about backyard ponds refers to the manner in which EPA has consistently and repeatedly overstepped its authority, literally going from protecting major waters such as the Great Lakes, to claiming federal authority over whether people are allowed to harvest rain water on their own properties.

Second point: Granted that federal authority is needed to enforce international treaties - in this particular case you are so up-in-arms about, pertaining to protecting the Great Lakes from various threats, ranging from pollutants to invasive species. Show me where the EPA and ONLY the EPA has the ability to administer said federal authority.

quiller

Quote from: mdgiles on March 19, 2017, 07:29:38 PM
You don't understand. Why does doing the few necessary actions these agencies perform, require ongoing governmental overreach?
In the case of Great Lakes protection, I don't see any overreach. The rest of their crap, not so much.

QuoteAnd how is pointing out these few necessary actions serve as an excuse for everything else they do?
Where did I assume that they did, or do, or will? Necessary needs no excuses.

quiller

Quote from: zewazir on March 19, 2017, 08:58:07 PM
First point: the comment about backyard ponds refers to the manner in which EPA has consistently and repeatedly overstepped its authority, literally going from protecting major waters such as the Great Lakes, to claiming federal authority over whether people are allowed to harvest rain water on their own properties.
I don't disagree they exceeded their brief. But as you state yourself, it isn't the Great Lakes that were the problem. The EPA exceeded that area, and then some.

QuoteSecond point: Granted that federal authority is needed to enforce international treaties - in this particular case you are so up-in-arms about, pertaining to protecting the Great Lakes from various threats, ranging from pollutants to invasive species. Show me where the EPA and ONLY the EPA has the ability to administer said federal authority.

I'm no lawyer. I also don't argue that the feds are the ultimate authority, whereas you appear to argue that they do not...or should not if it's the EPA.

quiller

For what it's worth....

Quote
Washington — Michigan Democratic Sens. Gary Peters and Debbie Stabenow joined with Ohio's Rob Portman, a Republican, to introduce a bipartisan bill this week authorizing research and monitoring in support of binational fisheries within the Great Lakes basin.

The Great Lakes Fishery Research Authorization Act would authorize the U.S. Geological Survey to support the $7 billion Great Lakes sport and commercial fishery industry. It seeks to close a gap in funding authorization between the Great Lakes Science Center, based in Ann Arbor, and those science centers focused on saltwater coasts across the country, according to a bill summary.

The Great Lakes Science Center is currently funded through the U.S. Geological Survey budget with no dedicated funding stream. The legislation would authorize $17.5 million a year in funding for the center for fiscal years 2018 through 2027.

Peters, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard, said the bill would create a steady funding stream and give the center the legislative authority to conduct cutting-edge research that will protect native fish populations and target invasive species.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2017/03/20/bill-seeks-dedicated-aid-ann-arbor-lakes-center/99394256/

Stabenow is mostly MIA and Peters is off on Cloud 9 with the other Dhimmis. But this does set up a separate controlling authority for research....at a whopping price.