Governor Markell suddenly very careful about which regulations to streamline or ignore...

It is OK, of course, for Governor Markell to streamline his way past hospital review standards when he wants a new hospital approved in Middletown. Just replace all the members of the review board who didn't vote his way the first time.

And it is OK, naturally, for Governor Markell to streamline his way past the Coastal Zone Act by consulting a private attorney, then claiming executive privilege, and then allowing DNREC to hide "secret" opinions from the Attorney General on the legality of it all.

But when advocates of streamling the process of certifying midwives did exactly what Governor Markell asked them to do, and brought up their suggestions, it was suddenly, ah, inappropriate.

From Momma Trauma:

About a year ago, Governor Jack Markell "required each department and agency within the Executive Branch that has adopted regulations subject to the Administrative Procedures Act... to conduct a review of certain well-established regulations on their books. The goal was to identify, then modify or eliminate, any regulations that have become outdated, duplicative or overly burdensome, or that otherwise no longer serve the purpose for which they were originally adopted," through Executive Order 36.

Midwifery supporters were heard loud and clear through this effort during a public comment period. Out of 64 comments received for Delaware's Department of Health & Social Services, 62 of them were directly related to regulations currently in place for the Practice of Non-Nurse Midwifery.

Despite this and information given directly to the Governor's staff in hopes of educating them further in their decision, "The Non-Nurse Midwifery comments did not fall within the scope of EO 36 because they relate to health and safety protections, not the streamlining of government or increasing efficiency. As such, the comments will be addressed in an appropriate setting and with the engagement of all stakeholders."

Really? Seems to me that what Governor Markell considers "an appropriate setting" will be jail if HB 194 passes the Senate.

Comments

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog