DL Open Thread: Thurs., Jan. 4, 2024
MAGAt Brain Part I: Apparently Delaware Rethugs have concluded that the Scourge Of Electric Cars is their hot button issue. You know, like abortion. Specifically, Mike Ramone. Filed yesterday in Delaware Superior Court:
Michael Ramone; Nandi Randolph; Samuel S. Sloan, owner of S&S Auto Repair; Richard G. Collins
v.
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control; Shawn M. Garvin
1/2/2024 S24C-01-004 CAK Karsnitz
Seeking:
Declaratory judgment. Plaintiffs seek to invalidate a new low-emission vehicle regulation imposed on vehicles weighing less than 14,000 pounds.
Oh, the attorney representing the plaintiffs?:
Julianne Murray
Law Offices of Murray, Phillips & Gay
Somebody has to make $$’s off of this frivolous suit. Might as well be the Rethug State Chair. Wonder who’s paying for it–Big Oil? An auto manufacturer? Harlan Crowe or another Clarence Thomas benefactor? It’s almost certainly someone who has underwritten the professorship of that climate denier at UD.
MAGAt Brain Part II: See if you can guess who wrote this ‘think’ piece for fellow MAGAts Mike Ramone and Lyndon Yearick that was posted in the Delaware State News. Go ahead, take a shot at it:
A controversial bill seeking to require law-abiding Delawareans to get a government permit before they canacquire a handgun was recently moved one step closer to becoming law through the most shameful oftactics.Senate Substitute 1 for Senate Bill 2, also known as the Permit to Purchase Bill, flies in the face of theconstitutional right granted to all Delawareans to acquire, possess and use firearms for hunting, recreationand defense.House and Senate Democrats, which enjoy large majorities in both legislative chambers, are pushing the billthrough the process believing this infringement on the rights of law-abiding citizens will prevent criminalsfrom acquiring and using handguns.A study by Delaware’s Criminal Justice Council Statistical Analysis Center exposes this flawed assumption.As detailed in Delaware Shootings 2020 — An Analysis of Incidents, Suspects, and Victims, of the 158people suspected of being involved with a shooting that year, more than three-quarters (77%) had at leastone arrest for a violent felony, with 57% having at least three such arrests. Of the 346 shooting victims, 73%had at least one violent felony arrest, with nearly 55% having three or more.So, although previously convicted felons are apparently responsible for the bulk of gun-related crimes,Democrats believe these criminals will obey their Permit to Purchase bill once its enacted.In the service of their ideological zeal, House and Senate Democrats have shed any pretense of caring orconsidering any perspective not in lockstep with their own.Consider that the latest version of this bill was introduced in the Senate on May 2 and passed by thatchamber on the same day, cutting corners on public notification and consideration.The bill cleared the Senate easily, with Democrats using their 15 to 6 supermajority to bully the measurethrough the chamber and effectively gag critics.On Dec. 14, Democratic lawmakers continued their despotic handling of the bill by releasing it from theHouse Appropriations Committee without a public meeting or advanced notice of the action.The legislation had to move through the committee because it carries a one-time cost of more than $2.6million to implement and nearly $8 million annually to operate.Rather than hold a hearing, as is usually done with most bills assigned to House committees — giving thepublic an opportunity to weigh in on the issue — committee chairwoman, State Rep. Kim Williams (D),chose to allow the measure to be “walked” out of the committee.The insider mechanism allowed the four Democrats on the committee to release the bill by simply givingtheir consent, not only excluding the two Republican committee members, but keeping the action secret…from them.The first notice the Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee received about the bill’s releasewas after House Democrats issued a press release praising themselves for their clandestine activities.While no laws were violated, Democratic legislators have sent two clear messages through their deeds. First,they will push the Permit to Purchase bill through the House, likely soon after the General Assemblyreconvenes Jan. 9. Second, and perhaps more importantly, they have told all Delawareans that transparencyand public inclusion in the legislative process are disposable concepts that they are free to disregard at theirwhim.House and Senate Democrats are self-assured that their policies are entirely correct, and any other viewpointis not only not worthy of being entertained, but must be silenced and pushed aside.Delawareans, through their individual choices at the ballot box, have inadvertently created a functionallyoppressive regime that tolerates no dissent and has no adequate check against its authority. Only the will of our citizens,
collectively expressed through their selections next November, can return our state government to one thatembraces diversity of thought and makes decisions built on prudent consensus.
Comprehensive rezoning appears to be on the skids in New Castle County after a sudden about-face by one of the county’s most powerful officials.
Since at least October, a public fight has been building over a controversial ordinance called 23-083 — an ordinance that would rezone dozens of properties and hundreds of acres in New Castle County in one fell swoop.
Proponents, including County Executive Matt Meyer, have said the ordinance is needed to comply with state law and would align the zoning map with a long-percolated 2022 comprehensive plan that guides growth and development in the county.
But as of Wednesday afternoon, Meyer had changed his mind. He now wants to scrap the comprehensive rezoning ordinance entirely. In part, he said, “misinformation” by critics of the ordinance had made moving forward no longer feasible.
What’s more, Meyer has no particular authority to call for an ordinance to be withdrawn once it’s been put forward to the County Council, said Councilwoman Janet Kilpatrick, one of the bill’s sponsors.
Uh, that’s not true. He can call for it to be withdrawn, Janet. Kilpatrick had already successfully killed the one project she wanted killed–the Incyte expansion at the Wilmington Friends School. As to the others, she couldn’t give a shit. She is, to put it mildly, disingenuous. But, I digress:
The ordinance now sits before the council, she said. And she intends to discuss it on its merits.
Which is where I tune out. A rare All Delaware edition of the Open Thread.
What do you want to talk about?
Just my two cents on two items… This BS about restricting the car you drive is a great reason to get rid of legislators that vote or support it! Nothing about your non efficient home heater putting out pollution or the trucks/airplanes/trains who’s emissions are greater than any car. Second, the only people that a permit to purchase a firearm will affect is the law abiding citizen that will have to pay as much to have the ability to buy a firearm as the cost of the firearm. Talk about adding burden to the poor people.
Dear Dougie dim-bulb,
Your Caesar Rodney/Heritage Foundation and NRA talking points are hardly worth two cents and you’re way over your intellectual budget as is. I’m sure you give a rats ass about “poor” people, NOT!
John Kowalko
Check those restrictions again. Nobody is restricting the car you drive.
By the time they fully kick in – if they’re not postponed, which there’s plenty of time to do as 2032 approaches – a lot of the people bitching about it will be dead.
Guns laws will affect the law-abiding? Yes, that’s the effect of all laws – the law-abiding follow them. And if we had total registration of firearms, like we do for your F-150, we would go a long way toward holding the guilty accountable.
Now explain why you need a firearm. And I said need, not want.
Anyone making 200% or below federal poverty will not have to pay for a permit and will have their training subsidized.
2 cents is on the high side for that.
@Doug-did you also rail against the federal seat belt mandate back in the day? Because that’s how I view the EV mandate – – the government taking action for the public good because individuals voluntarily won’t do it. There’s also tons of evidence that home energy efficiency efforts work and are increasing and the electrification of large truck and bus fleets is happening if you care to look.
My biggest issue with the electric car mandate is that they are ugly.
I have now leased three electric cars. Each one was an improvement and the last, and my current one is so cool, I really love it. So does my wife.
Most who criticize the proposed regulations have not read them nor paid attention to informed discussion.
Joe citizen, I get that you feel like someone kicked you in the face…it sucks, but it’s not the government, it’s the one per cent and their corporate lackeys who despise you, not me, and not the folks who proposed the regs that could go a long way to preventing Sussex County from disappearing beneath the Atlantic.
School shooting in Iowa today. Only two wounded, and shooter killed self, so no big deal. Still, I’ll be curious to learn how school shootings are Joe Biden’s fault.
https://www.kcci.com/article/perry-high-school-shooting-iowa/46284615#
I don’t understand so many talking points against EVs. But what confuses me the most is that the side against them normally likes competition and the free market. This is where the invisible hand is guiding us. Wouldn’t an alternative model, widespread and getting more affordable to many consumers, be a substitute that would help lower the prices for ICE autos too? Isn’t normally that how economics works, that when a nice substitute that a portion of the consuming public can purchase becomes more widely available, the price of the original would therefore fall? And wouldn’t that happen with gas prices too?
When the UAW won thir contract, the forward progress of EV’s in the U.S. was secured. The nonunion companies compete globally and will move forward as well. Elon is a wild card who may not be eclipsed but EV’s will soon enough dominate. I am 72 and by choice I drive a 17 year old Toyota product. Until October when I went to One car in the driveway my other car was a 23 year old Chevy. When my Toyota dies I will buy another 10-15 year old car. Nobody will stop me, parts will continue to be available, I’ll be fine. If I were in my productive years with a need for status I would buy an EV but in my case using old things is my choice. The sky is fallig R’s all know that the effective life of fossil fuel vehicles is 25 years or more. The sky is not falling there is a transition happening and the Luddites will as always be left where they are.
Wait a minute. So because Ramone thinks criminals won’t follow the process and get their permits to purchase, that’s a good enough reason to just not implement a law? Let’s start letting criminals dictate our laws….great plan Ramone.
Ramone says he is not a politician, but his words are loud and clear. He is not the right person to represent the interests of the 21st.
Please PLEASE donate to Frank Burns’ campaign and volunteer with his team knocking doors and making calls so we can get this idiot Ramone out of office.
Already donated. Will almost certainly donate again.
Definitely up for some door-to-door. Frank’s a wonderful candidate.