5 Comments
User's avatar
Andy Marks's avatar

It’s a great bill, but I think it’s a good thing it’s not getting a lot of media coverage. It may be another example of what Matt Yglesias has called Secret Congress. The less attention it gets, the less likely it is to be attacked by partisans and the more likely it is to get enacted.

Expand full comment
Jesse Noviello's avatar

Yeah I also worry that to much attention may polarize support this bill one way or other and block it from passage. It's somewhat unfortunate that the only way to get bipartisans bills done is when there is limited coverage but that does seem to be the reality we live in.

Expand full comment
Andy Marks's avatar

Pretty much. The good news is most issues are like that. I write about it from time to time on my newsletter. The link is below if you’re interested.

www.coldpoliticaltakes.substack.com

Expand full comment
Stephanie Nakhleh's avatar

I wrote a piece on it! But yeah, I noticed nobody else really was picking up on it. Probably since it's got a ways to go, still?

Expand full comment
James Rawls's avatar

The NEPA language is terrible. It waives site contamination and floodplain/floodway standards. It is anticlimate legislation. Klein and Thompson have done a terrible job of misleading people into thinking NEPA and CEQA are roughly the same. They are not.

Also, a duplex does not require lengthy review. HUD doesn't even do an EIS, which is typically required for large highway projects, every year nationwide (https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/environmental-review/environmental-impact-statements/). For a duplex, they only require a statutory checklist, and a community's entire single family program only needs one notice every five years. This NEPA legislation is dangerous and doesn't save much time, while creating obvious risks to public safety.

Expand full comment