So, they made it a “suggestion” to not contaminate the environment, got rid of a bunch of security requirements (Who needs security at a plant powering our cities anyway??), AND are upping the amount of radiation exposure someone can have before they seek treatment.
So, basically a bunch of evil shit. huh, whuda’thunk the same people that saw all the increase incidence of new cancers with all the PFAS in our water and food, and decided to roll back regulations on it while introducing a brand-new PFAS laden pesticide for all our crops! Wonderful! We’ll all get cancer and die early deaths because of them!
They’re making literally everything worse, murdering us in the street, arresting dissidents, covering up their crimes, and stealing billions while they do it.
Pika@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
I don’t see any company jumping at the rim to implement these though, especially considering the high change that it will just be overturned next party flip. Stuff like this needs bi-partisanship and transparency otherwise it just gets revoked when the party flips again.
it’s a waste of money until it’s clear both primary parties agree with the change, the fact it had to be done in silent/under the table says everything about the volatility of this change.
Kissaki@feddit.org 2 weeks ago
Companies may very well jump at the opportunity. Make a contract with the US government, with revocation cost paid in case of cancellation or regulation/contract basis changes written into it.
Like how a German minister contracted companies to implement the PKW Maut (Autobahn car fee), which was designed in a way criticized for probably violating EU law. And EU courts later ruled it to be in violation. The companies received 243 million €. (DE Wikipedia)
edible_funk@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
It’s for data centers so they can have their own roughshod nuclear power plants.
thinkercharmercoderfarmer@slrpnk.net 3 weeks ago
They aren’t a waste of money if investors can assume that there won’t be party changes in the future.