I don’t see any company jumping at the rim to implement these though, especially considering the high chance 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.
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)
I don’t see any company jumping at the rim to implement these though, especially considering the high chance 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.
It’s for data centers so they can have their own roughshod nuclear power plants.
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)
They aren’t a waste of money if investors can assume that there won’t be party changes in the future.