When bipartisanship is extremely difficult to come by, policymakers seem to agree on the urgency for permitting reform. The regulatory burden of the existing permitting process is hampering America’s infrastructure potential. From housing to major transportation projects, the lack of permitting reform can affect many critical projects. Under the status quo (without any reform), these projects are usually finished late and over budget with taxpayers and consumers footing the bill for these delays and added costs. Comprehensive reform of the country’s permitting process is needed to finally bring U.S. construction prices closer to international averages. The Biden administration and Congress are cognizant of the urgent need for change and have put forward reform proposals that are a good first step but fall short of what is needed. Without comprehensive reform, these reforms are likely to be mere band-aids rather than a sustainable solution. A large part of the root problem is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA is one of the most contentious federal statutes, allowing private entities to easily start litigation over the environmental review process. This can cause long delays to any project. This has enabled a small (but loud) minority to weaponize the environmental review process to sabotage projects they do not agree with by filing frivolous lawsuits. (READ MORE: Reversing America’s Decline) A recent study by the Breakthrough Institute shows that there has been a a sharp increase in the number of NEPA lawsuits since 2001. The success rate of these lawsuits has been a meager 20 percent. This same study found that this litigation process takes just over four years to complete. In essence, projects are subjected to years of delay because of these lawsuits. To make things worse, the study found that non-governmental organizations (NGO) started 72 percent of the total challenges, with just 10 NGOs being responsible for 35 percent of those lawsuits on their own. Permitting Reform Proposals The proposals brought forward by the Biden administration and the permitting reform bill led by Sen. Manchin (I-W.Va.) recognize the disruptive nature of NEPA and have included proposals to reign in its harmful effects. Manchin’s proposal would introduce various “shot clocks,” that would set deadlines for agencies to either approve or reject projects. It would also limit the window in which a third party can introduce a lawsuit. However, the bill’s provisions would only apply to energy and mineral projects.  Meanwhile, President Biden’s proposal focuses on housing. The administration would waive NEPA reviews for transit-oriented developments funded with federal loans under the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act or the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing programs. This benefit would apply if these projects do not expand the footprint of the building being converted or modify other facilities. It would also streamline the historic preservation review process for federal housing projects. These proposals have the potential to ameliorate some of the most egregious harms caused by the current permitting regime in this country. Unfortunately, they might not be enough. Comprehensive reform of the country’s permitting process is needed to finally bring U.S. construction prices closer to international averages. Otherwise, Americans will continue to overpay for basic infrastructure, housing, and power plants.  While NEPA’s environmental review is the most egregious offender of added costs, there is still significant ground to cover in terms of permitting. A video recently posted by Reason summarizes how the complex, multi-layered permitting requirements adds thousands of dollars in fees and delays in order to build housing on a vacant lot. This is one example of how the current permitting regime in America resembles a death by a thousand cuts, where the proliferation of efficiency or material standards, infrastructure mandates, and other sorts of policy-enabled micromanagement has hampered America’s capacity to build, and at the expense of the American taxpayer. (READ MORE from Juan Londoño: Don’t Regulate Data Centers Out of Existence) The perfect cannot be the enemy of the good. The administration’s proposal should alleviate some of the price surges in the housing market. Sen. Manchin’s bill (if passed) will unlock America’s capacity to produce energy efficiently. These are valuable first steps in reforming a broken permitting system. However, these cannot be the only steps taken. Comprehensive permitting reform should be a priority for the upcoming president and the Congress. Juan Londoño is a senior policy analyst at the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.  The post US Permitting Regime is Hampering America’s Potential appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

from Mark Dice: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

from Sputnik News: RIO DE JANEIRO (Sputnik) – Thousands of Brazilians took to the streets to protest against the decision of Judge Alexandre de Morais to block X, a Sputnik correspondent reported. On August 30, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered the blocking of X in the country due to Elon Musk’s […]

Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) claimed during an interview over the weekend that voters would be “abandon[ing] the Constitution” if they do not vote for Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris in November. Cheney made the remarks during a Sunday interview with Jonathan Karl on ABC News’ “This Week” while asked about her recent decision to endorse Harris over Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. Cheney’s endorsement of Harris comes despite her repeated warnings in the past about how far-left and dangerous is on numerous issues. “Kamala Harris is a radical liberal who would raise taxes, take away guns & health insurance, and explode the size and power of the federal gov’t,” Cheney warned in 2020. “She wants to recreate America in the image of what’s happening on the streets of Portland & Seattle. We won’t give her the chance.” Now Cheney claims that “those of us who are conservative, those of us who believe in fidelity to the Constitution have a responsibility and have a duty to recognize, this is not about partisan politics, and the country is going to need to rebuild true conservative movement when we’re through this election cycle.” “But this November, casting a vote for Donald Trump or writing someone in means that you’ve made the decision in too many instances that so many elected Republicans have made which is to abandon the Constitution,” she continued, “to tell yourself that this is just simply, you know, a partisan choice. That’s not what we’re facing this time around.” WATCH: Liz Cheney: “This November, casting a vote for Donald Trump or writing someone in means you’ve made the decision that in too many instances so many elected Republicans have made, which is to abandon the Constitution, to tell yourself that this is simply a partisan choice. That’s… pic.twitter.com/GJPj1VlIvk — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 8, 2024

Rep. Colin Allred (D-TX) lied this week when confronted during an interview that aired Sunday night about past remarks that he made about President Donald Trump’s border wall, claiming that his remarks were taken “out of context.” Allred, who is running as the Democrat Senate nominee against Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), made the false claim while being asked about campaign ads that he is facing where Cruz quotes Allred as saying: “If they build that racist wall, my generation is the one that will tear it down.” When asked if he still believed that the wall was “racist” and if he still supports tearing it down, Allred, who is trailing Cruz by several points in the polls, claimed: “Well, they were talking about, that’s a comment taken out of context, really.” He immediately deflected from answering question and attacked Cruz for not supporting the Democrats’ border security bill that many experts argued would actually make the Biden-Harris border crisis even worse than it already is. In a @tedcruz ad, @ColinAllredTX says “If they build that racist wall, my generation is the one that will tear it down.” He told us that quote was “taken out of context” and walls are “an important part” of border security. But, was that quote “taken out of context?” No. 1/2 pic.twitter.com/YyCzKCpftr — Ryan Chandler (@RyanChandlerTV) September 8, 2024 A clip from Allred’s 2018 primary race shows that he did make the remarks in the Cruz ad against him and that they were not taken out of context. Allred called the issue “the biggest issue facing the Democratic Party”, claiming that Trump’s immigration plan was “a racist plan.” “This plan is intended to take us back to a period in which we had a race-based immigration system,” he said. “I want to really briefly talk about this racist wall, because the symbol of this country cannot be a fence with a barbed wire on top of it. It has to remain the Statue of Liberty.” “And I tell you what, if they build that wall, my generation will be the one that tears it down, because we will not have this in this country,” he said. “We will not have… We’re not going to waste billions of our dollars on a racist campaign promise, and we’re not going to turn the symbol of this country into a wall with barbed wire on top of it.” Here’s the context from Allred’s 2018 primary. “This racist wall… if they build that wall, my generation will be the one that tears it down.” Two things can be true at the same time: Allred’s immigration views have evolved since 2018, and that quote is perfectly in context. pic.twitter.com/5BBVDddjkh — Ryan Chandler (@RyanChandlerTV) September 8, 2024

Damn, Drew! Tell us how you really feel