Brian Kim: Skepticism about $50 million EPA grant to study link between Pollution and Covid-19

 

Transcript

00:00
this is your stimulus check and second
stimulus check updates and also your
stimulus package update as of Wednesday
May 13th its stimulus update time let’s
jump right into the heroes Act this bill
is called a health and economic recovery
omnibus solutions Act it’s a mouthful
let’s see in further detail what’s in
this here is act stimulus package that
the Democrats wants so begin yes there
is a second round the stimulus checks
for twelve hundred in the heroes Act
you’ll notice that the majority of the
Republicans are saying that they’re
completely against this however we’re
getting mixed messages because President
Trump himself said I want to see a
payroll tax cut I want to see various
things that we want referring to the
Republicans I want the workers to be
taken care of we’re negotiating with the
Democrats
it looks like President Trump is open to
the second stimulus check as long as
Republican priorities are addressed
personally that sounds like a good
trade-off to me it it’s not even a trade
off this is a situation where everybody
wins people who are working will pay
less payroll taxes with the payroll tax
cut there’ll be you the worker paying
less Social Security Medicare taxes and
people get a second stimulus check it
that sounds like a good deal I don’t see
why that’s so hard
another major point is that the
Democrats want the $600 weekly
unemployment benefit extended from July
31st
to the end of the year to me I think
that would be insane to me that’s
unthinkable but you got to think is it
really if you’ve been following my
videos I’m covering the reopening of
other countries and other economies and
guess what they’re doing in the United
Kingdom the United Kingdom is extending
their furloughed worker program until
the end of October paying those people 3
approximately $3,000 a month
therefore I say don’t rule anything out
I don’t want to give anyone false hope
but these are crazy times and they may
be addressed by crazy measures but if
you do not me I’m all for people being
productive and working but this time I
02:31
mean you seriously got to give people a
02:33
break it’s it’s not the people’s fault
02:37
for being unemployed or underemployed
02:41
and for a lot of people this is the
02:44
first time for a lot of people this is
02:46
the first time that they’re getting
02:47
unemployment benefits so this is all new
02:50
to them to you I mean you complained you
02:53
can blame the government you can play
02:54
blame Kovac 19 but personally in my
02:57
opinion this is just my opinion this
02:59
this is not a time to blame the people
03:01
for being unemployed so it’s not really
03:04
people being lazy or unproductive I mean
03:07
this due to what’s been happening what
03:09
happened I just don’t see I don’t see it
03:12
fair blaming the people for being on
unemployment there’s a lot of good
things in the heroes Act that I totally
agree with such as a ban on the utility
a ban on the utility companies cutting
Off water and electricity during the
crisis but then again there’s a whole
bunch of stupid crap there’s a whole
bunch of stupid spending that I don’t
agree with such as 50 million dollars to
the Environmental Protection Protection
Agency the EPA to fund programs like
examining the prevalence of coronavirus
and high pollution districts what the
hell does that even mean let me repeat
that if you don’t if you didn’t catch
what I said give 50 million dollars to
examine how prevalence coronavirus is in
high pollution districts of course of
course the corona virus is going to be
prevalent in high pollution districts
just like it’s going to be prevalent in
low pollution districts you don’t need
to spend 50 million dollars to figure
that out this is so stupid this is one
good example of something so stupid in
this bill I mean what about
idiots let me give you a crash course on
governments kickbacks and politics 101
the government gives the government
04:31
gives 50 million dollars to the epa to
04:35
investigate how coronavirus is doing in
04:39
polluted areas if I’m a higher-up at the
04:44
EPA
04:45
you know guess what I’m gonna do I’m
04:48
gonna hire my cousin’s company and I’m
04:52
gonna pay my cousin’s company a million
04:54
dollars to do this investigation work
04:56
and he’s got he’s gonna get paid a
04:59
million dollars and he’s gonna he’s
05:01
gonna conclude with his examination
05:03
report yep
05:04
there’s coronavirus there it does exist
05:07
in polluted areas you know that 50
05:09
million dollars would have been better
05:11
spent on something more meaningful like
05:14
on people who actually need the aid all
05:19
right let’s move on to frigging
05:20
frustrated there’s also the mandatory
05:24
masks on Amtrak you’re gonna get a lot
05:28
of people fighting for their freedoms
05:30
and liberties and then you’re gonna have
05:31
people on the other side fighting for
05:33
safe safety and health health and safety
05:37
you’re most likely gonna pick a side or
05:40
you’re gonna be indifferent but I say
05:44
good luck in trying to change the mind
05:46
of the opposition this is gonna be a
05:48
circular circular argument so don’t even
05:50
try changing the opinion of the
05:53
opposition on this matter because it’s
05:55
not gonna work it’s it’s gonna be a
05:57
circular arguments there’s a 25 billion
06:01
of funding for the post office however
06:05
President Trump said he would only
06:07
support this if the post office decided
06:11
to raise their rates honestly I haven’t
06:16
I have not had time to look into this if
06:19
someone could comment I’d appreciate it
06:21
if this were the case and you wanted to
06:25
speculate again please let me know in
06:28
the comments wouldn’t this be the best
06:30
time to purchase forever stamps as like
06:33
an investment and then just resell them
06:34
on eBay or wherever
06:38
you know once they raise rates if you
06:41
could please help me on Kampala I’d
06:42
appreciate that the centerpiece of the
06:45
heroes Act is that aid to state and
06:49
local governments for nearly 1 trillion
06:50
dollars of the 3 trillion dollar
06:52
proposal remember this whole this whole
06:58
Democrat proposal is taking place in the
07:00
House of Representatives the Republicans
07:03
who control the Senate they’re saying
07:05
that would you send us the bill we’re
07:07
going to shut this down immediately
07:09
they’re saying that it stands no chance
07:12
because it doesn’t address the
07:14
priorities of what the Republicans are
07:16
looking for so there’s going to be some
07:18
tense negotiations and as I said before
07:21
there’s gonna be less bipartisan support
07:24
compared testing those package one two
07:26
three and four so they’re saying that
07:29
this is stimulus package for because
07:31
there’s stimulus package 1 2 3 and 3.2
07:33
but honestly this is going to be the
07:34
fifth stimulus package but expect less
07:37
bipartisan support going back to the
07:40
stimulus check the original stimulus
07:43
check for the current stimulus check so
07:45
stimulus check 1 please update your
07:47
information in the web portal today by
07:49
noon otherwise you’re getting a paper
07:50
stimulus check regarding the PPP loan I
07:53
know many of you have been funded with
07:56
SBA PPP loan you’re facing that
08:00
eight-week time crunch I know many of
08:04
you are hoping that the new legislation
08:05
will extend a deadline for you to spend
08:07
that PPP money on qualified expenses
08:10
within that eight week window but just
08:14
to place just to play it safe don’t
08:16
count on it happening
08:17
that’s just my recommendation I know
08:20
today’s videos longer but due to the
08:24
circumstances and all this news coming
08:25
out was a longer video so thanks thanks
08:29
again for joining me today that’s it for
08:31
today and thanks so much please stay
08:32
healthy and safe take care

 

 

Hi Brian,

Your recent video in which you mentioned a $50 EPA million grant to study covid-19 and pollution got me wondering.

So, I did some googling (covid-19+pollution+study) and found that there actually is real scientific research to be done on the link between covid-19 and pollution.

According to a BBC news article, a 2003 study found that for Sars, an earlier coronavirus, victims were 84% more likely to die if they lived in areas with polluted air.

If this pattern carries over to Covid-19, this might explain why covid-19 deaths were higher in New York City than in some more rural areas.

On the one hand, knowing that pollution may exacerbate covid-19 might make us feel bad because it might make covid-19 deaths feel less random.

On the other hand, if it is true, it could be seen as a positive for those who live in less polluted areas and it could affect how we weight covid-19 trade-offs.

The BBC article I mentioned also links to one of the previously published studies for more details.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200427-how-air-pollution-exacerbates-covid-19

I don’t know if that makes you feel any better about the money the government proposes to spend, but I was glad to learn that there was a least a rationale for the study.

 

Mueller-Report Standoff Echoes 1982 Fight Involving Neil Gorsuch’s Mother

Thorny legal questions about relations between Congress and executive branch could be decided by Supreme Court

The standoff between Attorney General William Barr and Congress over access to the full, unredacted report from special counsel Robert Mueller has parallels to a 1982 fight involving the late Anne Gorsuch Burford, then administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

The thorny legal questions about relations between Congress and the executive branch that were in play then and today could end up being decided by a Supreme Court that now features her son, Neil Gorsuch.

Then, like now, a Democratic House of Representatives wanted access to documents that a Republican president said were privileged law-enforcement materials. As a result of the Reagan administration’s refusal to comply with a congressional subpoena, Ms. Burford was cited for contempt, sparking a legal battle that culminated in her resignation.

Mr. Barr, who was a young lawyer in the Reagan administration at the time of the showdown involving Ms. Burford, is also expected to be cited for contempt. House Democratic leaders have scheduled a vote this week on a contempt resolution that would authorize a House lawsuit for access to the full Mueller report on Russian election interference. The Trump administration has said the report is protected by executive privilege. Another House committee is considering a separate contempt effort against Mr. Barr over census documents.

If either measure passes the full House, Mr. Barr will be only the third agency head ever held in contempt of Congress. Ms. Burford was the first, and Eric Holder, who was attorney general under President Barack Obama, was the second.

The Supreme Court has never decided the question of whether a congressional demand for information can overcome an executive-privilege claim by a presidential administration.

The 1982 fight involving Ms. Burford had its roots in the belief among a number of young lawyers in the Reagan administration that the Watergate scandal had weakened the presidency as an institution. Those lawyers wanted a test case to strengthen the executive branch’s hand in fighting back against demands from Congress for information and found one in Ms. Burford.

The Burford fight “was all part of the Reagan plan to retrieve purported lost powers as a result of Watergate and to create this unitary executive theory,” said Morton Rosenberg, a longtime legal analyst for the Congressional Research Service and now a fellow at the nonpartisan Project On Government Oversight.

Ms. Burford wrote in her 1986 memoir “Are You Tough Enough?” that the Reagan administration had first sought to enlist the interior secretary and the attorney general as possible test cases on executive privilege but they refused. Ms. Burford, however, agreed to test the constitutionality of an executive-privilege claim by refusing to hand over documents to Congress.

At issue were congressional subpoenas demanding information on hazardous waste dumps from the EPA. Mr. Reagan ordered Ms. Burford not to comply with the subpoena, citing the doctrine of executive privilege—a legal theory that has been blessed by courts that allows a president to shield some documents from public scrutiny in certain circumstances. In the landmark 1974 case United States v. Nixon, a unanimous Supreme Court said that executive privilege doesn’t protect documents in a criminal inquiry—in that case, Watergate—but has never decided a matter involving Congress.

Mr. Reagan’s executive-privilege claim prompted a fight with Congress that would result in the contempt citation against Ms. Burford. The Justice Department then filed suit on behalf of Ms. Burford to try to stop the subpoenas. Ms. Burford, in her memoir, called the lawsuit “the sloppiest piece of legal work I had seen in twenty years of being a lawyer.” Ultimately, a judge dismissed the case, saying that he could only rule on the issue if Ms. Burford were being criminally prosecuted for her refusal—and encouraged both sides to reach a compromise.

.. One of Justice Gorsuch’s most controversial opinions also stems from a case that involved the EPA under Ms. Burford’s leadership, Mr. Somin noted. The legal theory of “Chevron deference” says that courts should defer to administrative agencies. It stemmed from a 1984 Supreme Court case involving the EPA’s attempts to regulate air pollution.

Though the Supreme Court upheld deference to the EPA which was led by his mother when the case was first brought, Justice Gorsuch has called the decision an “abdication of the judicial duty” and suggested he would vote to overturn the precedent if a similar case came before the Supreme Court.

Pruitt unveils controversial ‘transparency’ rule limiting what research

Apr 24, 2018 – Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt listens to President … Scott Pruitt moved Tuesday to limit what science can be used in writing … The proposed rule would only allow the EPA to consider studies where the …

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-favor-transparency-but-say-epa-plan-will-limit-it/

Failure to Communicate

Trump has a solid record, but he’s too busy making noise to tout it.

If a tree falls in a noisy circus, does it make a sound? If the Trump administration announces its largest deregulatory effort to date while the president is in the throes of a Twitter rampage, will anybody pay attention?

No, and thereon may hang the balance of Republican congressional control. It’s never clear where Donald Trump gets political advice, if he does at all. What is clear is that this White House is doing an able job of whiffing one of the best political messages in decades, a reality that is demoralizing administration insiders and GOP candidates alike.

.. The Environmental Protection Agency and Transportation Department released a plan—announced on the website of these pages—to ax the Obama administration’s car-emissions standards, saving consumers $500 billion. Dollarwise, it may be the biggest deregulation ever.

.. The Treasury has recommended rescinding the “payday lending” rule, which threatened to cut off the poorest Americans from viable credit.

.. The Internal Revenue Service lifted a political threat to nonprofits by allowing them to shield the names of their donors.

.. The Department of Health and Human Services finalized its rule allowing more non-ObamaCare insurance options to millions of Americans. The Senate sent a $717 billion defense authorization bill to the White House, increasing active-duty strength and providing troops their largest pay raise in nine years. The Senate also confirmed the 24th Trump circuit-court judge.

.. The Labor Department released new numbers showing worker compensation increased 2.8% year over year, the fastest pace in a decade

.. Republicans have long known they don’t get a fair hearing from the press, which is why they shifted to talk radio and other alternative media. Mr. Trump understands that better than most—thus his heavy use of Twitter, live rallies and press conferences.

.. The president is certainly focused on his base, though with an eye to whipping them up with rallies focused primarily on the polarizing issues of trade and immigration. His tweets revolve around the same issues—those and Mr. Mueller—and are often defensive or whiny.

.. If Mr. Trump makes those centrists believe this election is about family separation, Republicans lose. If he refocuses it on voters’ newly thriving prospects, Republicans have a shot.

.. One remarkable aspect of the Trump administration is its productivity. The cabinet set a pace of reform in its openings weeks that has never lagged. If Mr. Trump isn’t going to spend every day embracing, elevating and making this product of his own presidency the dominant discussion, then no one will. The press isn’t going to do it. Democrats sure aren’t. And no other Republican has that megaphone.

Brett Kavanaugh Has Shown Deep Skepticism of Regulatory State

As an appellate judge in Washington, President Trump’s Supreme Court pick is known for ruling against regulators he sees as having overstepped their bounds

His dozen years on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit have been marked with dozens of votes to roll back rules and regulations. He has often concluded that agencies stretched their power too far and frequently found himself at odds with the Obama administration, including in dissents he wrote opposing net-neutrality rules and greenhouse-gas restrictions.

.. When a divided Supreme Court in 2015 rejected the Obama administration’s rules requiring power plants to cut mercury emissions and other pollutants, the majority opinion by conservative justices drew heavily from Judge Kavanaugh.

.. The high court cited his earlier dissent when he argued that the Environmental Protection Agency had failed to consider the costs of its regulations before moving forward. The EPA, he concluded, had ignored a requirement in the Clear Air Act that the agency determine whether an electric-utility regulation is “appropriate” before imposing it.

.. Too often, he found, judges were giving agency regulators the benefit of the doubt based on a doctrine that instructs judges to give more deference when the meaning of what Congress wrote isn’t precisely clear.That was the case, he thought, when the D.C. Circuit last year reviewed the legality of net-neutrality rules adopted by the Federal Communications Commission.

In a dissenting opinion, he said the FCC didn’t have the authority to classify internet providers as “telecommunications services” and ban them from splitting internet traffic into fast and slow lanes.

.. In a dissenting opinion, he said the FCC didn’t have the authority to classify internet providers as “telecommunications services” and ban them from splitting internet traffic into fast and slow lanes.

.. “He’s not coming with a machete and slashing through agency regulation,” said Mr. Adler, defending the judge’s record. “He’s holding agencies to a slightly higher standard than other judges.”

E.P.A. Aide Questioned Deleting Sensitive Meeting Details. Then She Was Fired.

Last summer one of his senior schedulers, Madeline G. Morris, was fired by Mr. Pruitt’s former deputy chief of staff, Kevin Chmielewski, who said he let her go because she was questioning the practice of retroactively deleting meetings from the calendar. Mr. Chmielewski has emerged as a harsh critic of Mr. Pruitt after a bitter falling out that led to his departure from the agency as well.

.. Madeline G. Morris, was fired by Mr. Pruitt’s former deputy chief of staff, Kevin Chmielewski, who said he let her go because she was questioning the practice of retroactively deleting meetings from the calendar.

..  One case involved the deletion of several of Mr. Pruitt’s meetings during a spring 2017 trip to Rome, including one with a controversial cardinal then under investigation for sexual assault.

.. The E.P.A. acknowledged in a series of legal memos last year that it did in fact direct an agency scheduler — although it did not name the person — to revise Mr. Pruitt’s daily calendar retroactively. The agency said it was doing so to remove errors that had been left in the electronic record after various events were canceled or happened differently than expected.

.. Ryan Jackson, Mr. Pruitt’s chief of staff, dismissed Mr. Chmielewski’s criticism as a fabrication by a disgruntled former employee. “Whatever he’s telling you about altering calendars is not correct,”

.. Ms. Morris was called last July by two agency lawyers, who told her that the changes she was making to Mr. Pruitt’s schedule might be illegal, according to a person familiar with the conversation. The following month, Ms. Morris noticed that a number of changes had been made to the record of a trip Mr. Pruitt had taken to Italy. Ms. Morris questioned the legality of the changes to Mr. Chmielewski and Mr. Jackson, and a few days later was fired, he said.

.. In another potential violation of federal law, the E.P.A. continued to pay Ms. Morris for six weeks after she was fired from the agency.

.. In July 2017, according to Mr. Chmielewski, Ms. Morris was instructed by him and Mr. Jackson to retroactively delete some meetings Mr. Pruitt held with lobbyists and replace them with staff meetings in the calendar, which was maintained in Microsoft Outlook. He and other people familiar with the calendar also said Ms. Morris was asked not to enter some of Mr. Pruitt’s meetings on the official calendar.

.. Mr. Chmielewski cited an August 2017 meeting with billionaire Denver-based businessman Philip Anschutz, a prominent donor to Republican Senate candidates and owner of an energy company regulated by the agency. Mr. Pruitt’s calendar for that day, which was publicly released, does not include the meeting.

.. including a special tour of the necropolis below St. Peter’s Basilica — as well as one meeting with Cardinal George Pell, a prominent Vatican leader who was then being investigated on allegations of sexual abuse.

Go for Growth, Fellow Dems

To counter Trump, become the party of inclusive prosperity.

 The attitude that regulation is fundamentally good—and any attempt to reduce it bad—is far too prevalent among Democrats.

..  No one at the EPA seems to have asked if its regulations were actually the best way to preserve wetlands.

..  companies expect to reinvest the bulk of the tax savings in higher wages, increased capital expenditures and research and development. The companies surveyed anticipated passing only a quarter to shareholders in dividends and buybacks.