News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Dissent at Facebook over hands-off stance on political ads by rocqua on Monday October 28, 2019 @06:07PM (#21382235)
Not saying that the current administration is trying to abuse this, but having the executive branch able to paralyze the body governing elections seems like a massive loophole.

Is this something that congress could (technically, not politically) fix themselves, or do they really depend on a nomination from the executive branch?

Re:Dissent at Facebook over hands-off stance on political ads by darkarmani on Monday October 28, 2019 @07:11PM (#21382771)
> Is this something that congress could (technically, not politically) fix themselves, or do they really depend on a nomination from the executive branch?

You could have any vacancy for more than X-days be filled by the minority party. (i mean even nominating an acting member -- you don't need to get an approval)

Re:Dissent at Facebook over hands-off stance on political ads by dmitrygr on Monday October 28, 2019 @07:51PM (#21383029)
Proposal assumes two parties and would codify this. Two parties is one of the ways Americans keep getting themselves screwed. No need to codify it. Maybe one day we shall fix it?
Re:Dissent at Facebook over hands-off stance on political ads by r00fus on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @12:36AM (#21384270)
Other parts of norms and conventions in USG assume two parties as well.
Re:Dissent at Facebook over hands-off stance on political ads by apendleton on Tuesday October 29, 2019 @11:56AM (#21388597)
They can't appoint people, but they could change the quorum rules to allow the currently sitting commissioners to regulate. It would require Presidential signature, though, or enough votes to override a veto.