Submitted a comment opposing the proposed Schedule F change.
Was a bit dismayed to see that there are a great many public comments supporting the rule change, parroting the GOP line that the proposed change reins in the over-influence of unelected bureaucrats.
That is unfortunate about the comments in support. This is a quieter change than everything we've seen over the last five months, but it's more lasting.
One of the other drastic and potentially long lasting changes in process is the BBB provision that would prohibit federal courts from issuing TROs or injunctions against government agencies unless plaintiff posts a (prohibitively expensive!) bond. I'm somewhat hopeful that application of the Byrd Rule in the Senate will lead to excision of that provision.
Actually there are vastly more comments against the change (~28K against v 1.5K for). And many of the “pro” comments are identical. This project is tracking the comments:
Thanks Adrianne. Obviously I didn't myself sample the comments enough to see that quantitative overview. I think of course that public comments are going to be entirely ignored and this change implemented anyway. (Unless Repubs in Congress happen to grow a spine, of which there still is only scan sign.)
Submitted a comment opposing the proposed Schedule F change.
Was a bit dismayed to see that there are a great many public comments supporting the rule change, parroting the GOP line that the proposed change reins in the over-influence of unelected bureaucrats.
It is great that you submitted a comment.
That is unfortunate about the comments in support. This is a quieter change than everything we've seen over the last five months, but it's more lasting.
One of the other drastic and potentially long lasting changes in process is the BBB provision that would prohibit federal courts from issuing TROs or injunctions against government agencies unless plaintiff posts a (prohibitively expensive!) bond. I'm somewhat hopeful that application of the Byrd Rule in the Senate will lead to excision of that provision.
Actually there are vastly more comments against the change (~28K against v 1.5K for). And many of the “pro” comments are identical. This project is tracking the comments:
https://schedule-f.vercel.app/page/1/size/10
Info also captured in Moynihan’s post referenced above.
Thanks Adrianne. Obviously I didn't myself sample the comments enough to see that quantitative overview. I think of course that public comments are going to be entirely ignored and this change implemented anyway. (Unless Repubs in Congress happen to grow a spine, of which there still is only scan sign.)