Quotulatiousness

July 4, 2022

A first, tentative step to reining back the juggernaut that is the modern administrative state

Filed under: Bureaucracy, Government, Law, USA — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 05:00

Brad Polumbo has words of praise for US Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch:

Panorama of the west facade of United States Supreme Court Building at dusk in Washington, D.C., 10 October, 2011.
Photo by Joe Ravi via Wikimedia Commons.

“Vesting federal legislative power in Congress [rather than bureaucrats]”, Gorsuch writes, “is vital because the framers believed that a republic — a thing of the people — would be more likely to enact just laws than a regime administered by a ruling class of largely unaccountable ‘ministers’.”

But what about those, like dissenting Justice Elena Kagan, who say that federal bureaucrats need wide latitude because Congress is failing to, in their view, adequately address climate change?

“Admittedly, lawmaking under our Constitution can be difficult,” Gorsuch acknowledges. “But that is nothing particular to our time nor any accident.”

“The framers believed that the power to make new laws regulating private conduct was a grave one that could, if not properly checked, pose a serious threat to individual liberty …” he said. “As a result, the framers deliberately sought to make lawmaking difficult by insisting that two houses of Congress must agree to any new law and the President must concur or a legislative supermajority must override his veto.”

With an empowered, unelected bureaucracy, “agencies could churn out new laws more or less at whim”, Gorsuch adds. “Intrusions on liberty would not be difficult and rare, but easy and profuse.”

This isn’t hypothetical speculation — it’s exactly what we’ve seen under the status quo.

For a glaring example, just consider the Centers for Disease Control’s pandemic-era “eviction moratorium”. The federal agency unilaterally declared that evictions nationwide were prohibited in many circumstances by citing an old statute that gave the CDC director the ability to order in specific places “such measures to prevent such spread of the diseases as he/she deems reasonably necessary, including inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, and destruction of animals or articles believed to be sources of infection.”

They went from that to a nationwide “eviction moratorium”. Stretch, much?

That’s right: Unelected government officials effectively commandeered the nation’s rental market, which caused tremendous dysfunction, trampled over property rights, and sabotaged the supply of rental housing. (For which prices are now surging. Shocker!) And, it was years before the courts finally stopped them and struck down the “moratorium”.

A Dish for the First 4th of July … and why it should be on the 2nd

Filed under: Food, History, USA — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 04:00

Tasting History with Max Miller
Published 30 Jun 2020

While we may think of BBQ, hot dogs, and potato salad as traditional 4th of July fare, the Founding Fathers certainly did not. We’ll take a look at one of the earliest celebratory meals and explore why John Adams wasn’t a fan of July 4th.

Follow Tasting History with Max Miller here:
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tastinghist…
Twitter: https://twitter.com/TastingHistory1
Reddit: r/TastingHistory

Help Support the Channel with Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/tastinghistory

LINKS TO INGREDIENTS & TOOLS**
Organic Nut Milk Bag: https://amzn.to/3i6D3sh
Wilton Candy Thermometer: https://amzn.to/3i0Kkdb

LINKS TO SOURCES**
1776 the Musical: https://amzn.to/3eDvXZX
John Adams by David McCullough: https://amzn.to/3i3SBNj
1776 by David McCullough: https://amzn.to/3i8cAKY
Townsends: Spanish Cooking – Salmon and Onions From 1750 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjrGc…
The Martha Washington Cook Book: A Compendium of Cookery and Reliable Recipes: https://amzn.to/38dRwhz
Did you know… Independence Day Should Actually Be July 2nd?: https://www.archives.gov/press/press-…

**Amazon offers a small commission on products sold through their affiliate links, so each purchase made from this link, whether this product or another, will help to support this channel with no additional cost to you.

MENTIONED LINKS
Everlasting Syllabub: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQksG…

Poached Salmon in Egg Sauce
ORIGINAL RECIPES (From The Martha Washington Cook Book)
EGG SAUCE
Make a drawn butter; chop two hard-boiled eggs quite fine, the white and yolk separately, and stir it into the sauce before serving. This is used for boiled fish or vegetables.

TO MAKE DRAWN BUTTER
Put half a pint of milk in a perfectly clean stewpan, and set it over a moderate fire; put into a pint bowl a heaping tablespoonful of wheat flour, quarter of a pound of sweet butter, and a saltspoonful of salt; work these well together with the back of a spoon, then pour into it, stirring it all the time, half a pint of boiling water; when it is smooth, stir it into the boiling milk, let it simmer for five minutes or more, and it is done.

Drawn butter made after this recipe will be found to be most excellent; it may be made less rich by using less butter.

Boiled Salmon
The middle slice of salmon is the best. Sew up neatly in a mosquito-net bag, and boil a quarter of an hour to the pound in hot, salted water. When done, unwrap with care, and lay upon a hot dish, taking care not to break it … Garnish with parsley and sliced eggs.

MODERN RECIPE
INGREDIENTS
– 2 Hard Boiled Eggs, chopped into small pieces
– 1 Cup (240ml) of whole milk
– A heaping tablespoon of flour
– 1 Stick or 113g of softened butter
– ½ teaspoon salt
– 1 Cup of boiling water
– Salmon
– Salted Water

METHOD
1. Add the milk to a sauce pan and set over medium heat and simmer making sure not to scorch it.
2. In a small bowl, add the flour, the butter, and the salt, and mix together. Slowly add the boiling water while continuing to stir. Once smooth, pour into the milk and allow to simmer for 5 minutes. Then stir in the chopped eggs and allow to simmer for another minute, then remove from the heat.
3. Fill a medium saucepan half full with water and add some salt (about 2 tsp). Set over low heat and bring to a simmer of 175-180°F/80°C. Place salmon into the water and cook until ready (12-15 per pound). Make sure not to let the temperature raise past the 180°F.
4. Once cooked, place salmon on a warm dish and pour the egg sauce on top. Garnish with parsley.

PHOTO CREDITS
Richard Henry Lee: National Portrait Gallery / CC BY (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/…)

MUSIC CREDITS
Record Scratch – Raccoonanimator https://freesound.org/s/160909/

#tastinghistory #colonialcooking #4thOfJuly #IndependenceDay

(Very expensive) roads, bridges, and railways to nowhere

In Palladium, Brian Balkus wonders why American can’t build anything any more:

Construction of the Fresno River Viaduct in January 2016. The bridge is the first permanent structure being constructed as part of California High-Speed Rail. The BNSF Railway bridge is visible in the background.
Photo by the California High-Speed Rail Authority via Wikimedia Commons.

Sepulveda’s cost and schedule overrun aren’t even the worst of it. Just as unattainable as a shortened commute is the Californian dream of building a bullet train that could take you from Los Angeles to San Francisco in under three hours. In 2008, a year before the Sepulveda project began, the state tried to turn this dream into a reality after voters approved a 512-mile high-speed rail (HSR) project. Amid failing overseas wars and financial crises, at the time it could’ve become a symbol of renewal not just for California but the entire country. Instead, it came to exemplify a dysfunctional government that lacks the capacity to build.

At the time California began accelerating the development of its HSR system it only had 10 employees dedicated to overseeing what was the most expensive infrastructure project in U.S. history. It ended up 14 years (and counting) behind schedule and $44 billion over budget. Incredibly, the state has not laid a single mile of track and it still lacks 10 percent of the land parcels it needs to do so. Half of the project still hasn’t achieved the environmental clearance needed to begin construction. The dream of a Japanese-style bullet train crisscrossing the state is now all but dead due to political opposition, litigation, and a lack of funding.

Despite its failure, the HSR project inaugurated the U.S.’s megaproject era. Once a rare type of project, by 2018 megaprojects comprised 33 percent of the value of all U.S. construction project starts. An alarming number of these have spiraled out of control for many of the same reasons that killed the California bullet train. The decade that followed the financial crisis was a kind of inflection point in the industry; this was when construction projects became noticeably worse and when the long-term implications could no longer be ignored. One of the most cited studies of the U.S.’s declining ability to build reviewed 180 transit megaprojects across the country, revealing that today, U.S. projects take longer to complete and cost nearly 50 percent more on average than those in Europe and Canada.

Having joined Kiewit in 2010, I witnessed these changes first-hand. I have since moved on, but have remained in the broader industry, including working on what are called “strategic pursuits” — the process by which companies compete for megaprojects. This experience has provided insight into the mechanics of how these projects are awarded and why they so frequently fail.

Even if the construction had proceded close to schedule, the economic justification for California’s high speed rail line was never strong … and it’s unlikely the service would have come close to breaking even. It almost certainly would have added significant ongoing costs to Californian taxpayers, and due to the nature of high speed rail services, been effectively a subsidy from working-class Californians to the laptop elites of Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay area.

All of that, however, are merely additional reasons to believe the project was doomed from inception. Broadly speaking, all major infrastructure projects in the United States are struggling with paperwork and compliance requirements mostly driven by state and federal environmental regulations passed with the best possible intentions (as the saying goes):

Sepulveda’s numerous lawsuits and stakeholder conflicts are an example of a phenomenon that can be traced back to the passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969. NEPA mandates developers to provide environmental impact statements before they can obtain the permits necessary for construction on huge swathes of infrastructure.

Shortly following the passage of NEPA, California’s then-governor Ronald Reagan signed the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) into law, which required additional environmental impact analysis. Unlike NEPA, it requires adopting all feasible measures to mitigate these impacts. Interest groups wield CEQA and NEPA like weapons. One study found that 85 percent of CEQA lawsuits were filed by groups with no history of environmental advocacy. The NIMBY attitude of these groups has crippled the ability of California to build anything. As California Governor Gavin Newsom succinctly put it, “NIMBYism is destroying the state”.

It is also destroying the U.S.’s ability to build nationally. The economist Eli Dourado reported in The New York Times that “per-mile spending on the Interstate System of Highways tripled between the 1960’s and 1980’s.” This directly correlates with the passage of NEPA. If anything, the problem has gotten worse over time. Projects receiving funding through the $837 billion stimulus plan passed by Congress in the aftermath of the financial crises were subject to over 192,000 NEPA reviews.

The NEPA/CEQA process incentivizes the public agencies to seek what is often termed a “bulletproof” environmental compliance document to head off future legal challenges. This takes time, with the average EIS taking 4.5 years to complete. Some have taken longer than a decade. A cottage industry of consultants is devoted to completing these documents, earning themselves millions in fees.

Planes I True My Wood With | Paul Sellers

Filed under: Tools, Woodworking — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 02:00

Paul Sellers
Published 18 Mar 2022

There is no doubt that truing up wood using hand planing methods can be a daunting thought. So we hope that this video of Paul’s strategy will make planing wood much easier for you.

Using a combination of planes and techniques makes the highs low and brings the lows high. This system works like no other so enjoy a strategy that Paul has used for decades in straightening and squaring his wood ready for joinery.
——————–

Want to learn more about woodworking?

Go to Woodworking Masterclasses for weekly project episodes: http://bit.ly/2JeH3a9

Go to Common Woodworking for step-by-step beginner guides and courses: http://bit.ly/35VQV2o

http://bit.ly/2BXmuei for Paul’s latest ventures on his blog

——————–

Instagram: http://bit.ly/2oWpy7W

Twitter: http://bit.ly/33S7RFa

Pinterest: http://bit.ly/35X5uTf

QotD: The French solution to trench warfare

That isn’t to say that battlefield tactics hadn’t improved. Quite to the contrary, 1918 saw both the Germans and the Allies deploy far more effective systems for assaulting trenches, though I would argue that it was actually the French who came closest to having the matter as figured out as one could have it with the equipment of 1918. The French method, termed la bataille conduite (“methodical battle”) has an understandably poor reputation because this method failed so badly against the technologies of 1940 but as we’ve seen that was quite a different technological environment than 1918.

On the defensive, the French had adopted many of the same principles of the German defense-in-depth we’ve already discussed. On the offense, they came to favor (particularly under the influence of Philippe Pétain and […] Ferdinand Foch) an offensive doctrine designed to maximize France’s position in an attritional contest: that is to limit losses and maximize enemy casualties while still taking and holding ground. The system favored limited “bite-and-hold” attacks, ideally limited such that the attack stopped before triggering the inevitable German counter-attack. Remember that it was when the attacker ran out of steam and the defender’s counter-attack came that the casualty ratios tended to shift to favor the defender. In French thinking, the solution was just to not reach that point.

Instead, the French came to favor – and the British and Americans picked up the same method by the end – elaborately prepared small offensives. The elaborate preparation meant planning out the attack carefully, using shorter but carefully planned hurricane barrages (all of this planning, of course took time) and then seizing the enemy’s forward positions and just their forward positions. Instead of then trying to push through – the old French notion of assault brutal et continu (“brutal and continuous” – a “keep up the pressure till they break” method) which Robert Nivelle had favored – methodical battle focused on “bite-and-hold”.

Once you hit your limited objectives in that first rush where enemy resistence is disoriented (from the short, hurricane barrage) and weaker – and thus where the casualty ratio favors you – you stop and begin fortifying your position. You dig those communications trenches, move up your artillery and brace for the counter-attack. By the time the enemy realizes you aren’t going to attack his second or third line positions (and trigger his devastating counter-attack), you are dug in and prepared for his attack (the hold part of “bite-and-hold”). To reestablish defense in depth, the defender now has to back up to establish new lines to the rear (or launch his own fresh offensive, but by late 1918, the Germans were too weak for this). A long series of such attacks – with significant intervals for fresh careful planning and stockpiling resources – could slowly but surely lever your opponent off of key positions, one by one. It would also preserve a favorable balance of casualties, ensuring that in the end, the enemy runs out of men and shells before you do (that is the “rupture” that Joffre had always hoped for, but which arrived but two years too late for his career).

Such a slow, expensive, bloody and unglamorous strategy was in some ways only politically possible once, by 1918, it had become apparent that all other options were exhausted. That said, to argue that this bite-and-hold operational doctrine broke the trench stalemate is probably not fair either. The progress of allied offensives in 1918 was extremely slow by even the standards of 1914. The German Spring Offensive was well and truly done in July and the Allied offensive picked up in August and ran through November as fast as it could (with Foch doing everything short of getting out and pushing the offensive to try to speed it up) and yet the final allied positions by November were not even in Germany. Even at its greatest distance in 100 days of unbroken victories by a force with materiel and numerical superiority, the front moved less than 100 miles and the overall casualty ratio was roughly even (around a million on both sides).

Bret Devereaux, “Collections: No Man’s Land, Part II: Breaking the Stalemate”, A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry, 2021-09-24.

Powered by WordPress