• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

US House Committee Drama Llama: Adam Schiff, Eric Swalwell, and Ilhan Omar Kicked Off of Committees

This person's critique of Israel is "Israel needs to reject their conservative faction".
Why? A healthy democracy should have both sides of the aisle thriving. The problem with politics in Israel is not that it has a conservative faction, but that the left-of-center faction (Labor etc.) is moribund. Labor itself got <4% in last elections.

By the way, in "Palestine" conservative and moderately left factions would be a great improvement. All factions with any detectable support are either some flavor of fascist (Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad) or else Marxist-Leninist (PFLP, splitters!). Not that they had any elections recently. Mahmoud Abbas, the PA president, is in the 19th year of his 4 year term.
Moderate Palestinian factions would be dead.

Nothing about Jews.
Do not be deceived. The reason Israel is judged by a very different standard than any other country is that it is the Jewish state.
If US kills Al Shabab terrorists in Somalia or ISIS terrorists in Syria, nobody bats an eye. But if US takes out Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists in Gaza or Jenin, many people lose their minds.
Exactly. We inflict a lot more collateral damage than Israel does.

The West Bank, when they have independence, will probably have a conservative faction they need to oust.
As I said, them having a conservative faction would be a great improvement over their current political landscape.
"Factions" in the Palestinians represent where the terrorist money comes from, not what the people want. It's impossible for the Palestinians to have a meaningful representative government until that terrorist money is severely curtailed.

The most important health and safety restriction through all time is "don't use heavy metals, including and especially lead, or friable mineral materials where living creatures can get impacted by them or their use or manufacture."
Lead has many legitimate uses. And while we can transition away from lead now, we probably would not have been able to develop modern technology that we do have. And technically uranium is a heavy metal, and nuclear power is a very clean and safe one (based on deaths per TWh produced).
Yeah, heavy metals become an issue when you use them in non-recoverable forms. They're not a problem when a proper recovery system exists.

What I would like to see is mandated deposits on heavy metals. To pull a number out of the air for illustration lets say $10/kg on lead, indexed for inflation. The recipient pays the source that amount independent of any other aspects of the transaction. (If you're mining them the recipient is the government.) The government is always a "buyer", although they need not actually pay anything beyond the deposit amount. Gathering it from loose forms in the environment (which would include ordinary trash landfills!) is not mining as it was already extracted.

Set the deposit high enough to get most of it recycled when the current use is no longer functional or needed. (I've got a decent amount of lead around here in the form of worn-out lead-acid batteries and no meaningful recycling options for it. That sort of situation should not exist for a material we don't want loose in the environment! A few now serve secondary duty as weights (they're AGM, not wet cells, no acid issues) but most just are stacked up awaiting a practical way to recycle them.)


Right behind that is "don't extract too much bound up carbon"
What is too much? Would we have technology for modern EVs if we did not use carbon based high energy density sources like coal and oil to jumpstart the industrial revolution? I doubt it.
While most carbon uses aren't recoverable I favor the same approach--a cost per kg for mining (or drilling) it.
 
Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives - Member Profiles - finally getting to see which committees everybody is in. Ballotpedia has committees for previous years.

  • 2016:
    • Pramila Jayapal: Judiciary, Budget // Judiciary, EdWork, Budget // Judiciary, EdWork, Budget // Judiciary, EdWork
  • 2018:
    • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Oversight, FinServ // Oversight, FinServ // Oversight, NatRsrc
    • Ayanna Pressley: Oversight, FinServ // Oversight, FinServ // FinServ
    • Rashida Tlaib: Oversight, FinServ // Oversight, FinServ // FinServ
    • Ilhan Omar: ForAff, EdWork, Budget // ForAff, EdWork // (ForAff), EdWork, Budget
    • Katie Porter: FinServ // Oversight, NatRsrc // Oversight, NatRsrc
  • 2020:
    • Jamaal Bowman: EdWork, SciSpcTech // EdWork, SciSpcTech
    • Cori Bush: Oversight, Judiciary // Oversight, Judiciary
    • Marie Newman: TransInfra, SmallBiz
    • Mondaire Jones: EdWork, Judiciary, Ethics
  • 2022:
    • Delia Ramirez: Veterans, HomeSec
    • Summer Lee: Oversight, SciSpcTech
    • Greg Casar: Oversight, Agriculture
    • Maxwell Frost: Oversight, SciSpcTech
    • Becca Balint: Oversight, Budget
    • Jasmine Crockett: Oversight, Agriculture
In 2021, Katie Porter wanted to get into Financial Services, but was not successful. She went to Natural Resources instead.

I added up the numbers for them, averaging over each member: Oversight: 9., EdWork: 3.75, FinServ: 3., Judiciary: 3., SciSpcTech: 3., Budget: 2.42, Agriculture: 2., Ethics: 1., HomeSec: 1., NatRsrc: 1., SmallBiz: 1., TransInfra: 1., Veterans: 1., ForAff: 0.67, (ForAff): 0.33

So the favorite committee of this new crop of progressives is the Oversight Committee.
 
I repeated the analysis, but without averaging over members, thus giving the total number of times in some committee. Oversight: 16, EdWork: 9, FinServ: 9, Judiciary: 7, Budget: 6, SciSpcTech: 4, NatRsrc: 3, Agriculture: 2, ForAff: 2, Ethics: 1, (ForAff): 1, HomeSec: 1, SmallBiz: 1, TransInfra: 1, Veterans: 1

Oversight is the favorite here also.
 
McCarthy pushes ahead with task force to evict lawmakers from committees | The Hill
Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is charging ahead with his plan to create a bipartisan House task force designed to lay out ground rules for booting lawmakers from their committee seats, the Speaker’s office confirmed Friday.

Republicans named to the panel will be Reps. Nancy Mace (S.C.), David Joyce (Ohio), Ken Buck (Colo.) and Tom Cole (Okla.), who chairs the Rules Committee, his office said.

The plan, first reported Friday by The Washington Post, also has buy-in from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), who has reportedly named Democratic Reps. Jim McGovern (Mass.), Derek Kilmer (Wash.), Veronica Escobar (Texas) and Nikema Williams (Ga.) to the panel.
noting
When can lawmakers be removed from committees? A task force could help decide. - The Washington Post
Let's see if it gets anywhere.
 
Back
Top Bottom