121–130 of 190 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is returning to its pre WW2 norm. The postwar era was the exception. US democracy has long been tenuous or for the “right people”.
An 80y exception in a 250y timeline?
But yes, a lengthy period with a unifying adversary that felt like an existential threat did a lot to unify the US
This is the signal the the government no longer serves the people. Delivering water is a basic government function. If they won’t make water a right, expect large numbers of dead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Not everything you want - or need - is a right. Ok, agreed. But safe drinking water, should maybe be one of the exceptions? > And establishing a new right is not the only way to get what you want or need. What's a better way to guarantee safe drinking water to everyone?
> safe drinking water, should maybe be one of the exceptions? If we invert it to the actual reality (many places have unsafe drinking water), then we get "the right to avoid being poisoned by your government". It sounds obvious to me that that should already be the case. But I don't know much about water treatment. Maybe it isn't always feasible? Do people just have to drink bottled water in some places? Or get rever…
That would be really convenient for companies that sell bottled water
"Engelhardt stated there is no “constitutional right to truthful information from officials during a public health crisis.” " " “Defendants’ actions allegedly deprived Plaintiffs of clean water and guileless information. These deprivations, while grievous, do not infringe upon any deeply rooted constitutional right.”" He basically says, the constitution does not care, whether the government lies to citizens, so they…
So from now on you can safely assume your government is lying (especially the current administration). Worrisome...
Plaintiffs ... seek recognition of two new constitutional rights lacking any foundation in the history and tradition of our Nation—the right to be free from exposure to contaminated water and the right to accurate information from public officials. This is like filing a bug report that the Linux kernel allowed your Thunderbird to receive SPAM email containing false information. It's just a fundamental misunderstandin…
The first one I can understand from history (although I do not agree for modern times). But the right to accurate information from public officials, I thought that was indeed an absolute and basic right in a democracy, and it should very strongly be and always have been. (Exceptions like "national security" notwithstanding, and those should probably be more narrowly restricted than they are now.)
In many countries, both democratic and not, police can lie (e.g. to try to get a suspect make a mistake and expose some information).
This is the signal the the government no longer serves the people. Delivering water is a basic government function. If they won’t make water a right, expect large numbers of dead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is returning to its pre WW2 norm. The postwar era was the exception. US democracy has long been tenuous or for the “right people”.
Pre (like 20+yr) WW2 the scope of the activities that the government laid claim to was infinity smaller so the blast radius was likewise infinitely more limited. This is how you wound up with historically ethnic banks, universities, etc, etc. Black guy, pole, whatever, can't get a loan (well they can, at a "fuck you" price) from the wasp bank so they go to the lending group they know through their church or whatever.…
Keep in mind the US government pre watergate did a lot of spying on political opponents (MLK, Malcolm X, etc). Presidents impounded funds pre Watergate at alarming rates.
We put US citizens in camps during WW2 for being of Japanese descent. See also native Americans and the Federal govts enforcement of slavery.
You might say the govt has just grown in proportion to the container it’s held in.
The victims can sue the city/state. They might already be doing so in parallel. And honestly that’s the only way to be made whole: these city officials don’t have the tens of millions that would be required to compensate victims. This is more about holding government officials individually accountable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not everything you want - or need - is a right. And establishing a new right is not the only way to get what you want or need.
I am absolutely mindboggled at the idea that you think the US should not guarantee safe drinking water everywhere for everyone. Unless this comment is pedantic legal snark.
I think that perhaps you don't understand what a right means, in the context of government services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not US citizen, I am (was) just a visitor (and consumer). I do not care about your local problems! Jackson gov was happy to poison people to save face and money. Some other people are happy to poison people with chlorine, to save on plastics. As a consumer, I have a right to choose whatever I feel is safe for me!
Neither am I. But presumably you're a citizen of somewhere. And that place should provide you with safe drinking water.
Making tap water drinkable, while 99% gets used for utilities, is seen as wasteful.