House Passes Bill To Speed Federal Permitting For Natural Gas Pipelines
On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 213 to 184 to approve legislation designed to expedite federal permitting for interstate natural gas pipelines. The legislation would appoint the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as the primary agency for pipeline permitting evaluations.
The legislation would permit FERC to consider water quality evaluations during its environmental review, rather than awaiting independent Clean Water Act certifications from states, as reported by Reuters.
Proponents assert that state-level certifications frequently prolong pipeline approvals for several years. The legislation is named the Improving Interagency Coordination for Pipeline Reviews Act.It is among various initiatives in Congress designed to expedite federal permitting procedures.
The Promoting Efficient Review for Modern Infrastructure Today Act also received bipartisan approval in the House.
Legislators have prioritized extensive permitting reform to enhance energy infrastructure in response to increasing electricity demand.
This demand has increased partly due to the swift proliferation of data centers nationwide.
Proponents of the legislation contend that expedited permitting may alleviate household energy expenses.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) typically consists of five commissioners, nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
The agency has sanctioned the majority of natural gas pipeline proposals submitted to it in recent years.
“These bills facilitate the development of the infrastructure necessary for America to satisfy the increasing demand for affordable, reliable energy,” stated Mike Sommers, President of the American Petroleum Institute.
The Senate is undertaking a distinct initiative to reform energy permitting that will encompass a wider scope than the legislation approved by the House.
Senate legislators are concentrating on amendments to the National Environmental Policy Act, which regulates environmental assessments for significant infrastructure initiatives.
The initiative would encompass reforms aimed at enhancing electric transmission lines.
A solitary left-wing legislator’s attempt to impeach President Donald Trump once more was unsuccessful on Thursday, as approximately twenty Democrats allied with Republicans to thwart the initiative.
Representative Al Green (D-Texas) initiated proceedings on two articles of impeachment late Wednesday by presenting a privileged resolution, a procedural mechanism that mandates the House to address a measure within two legislative days.
On Thursday, Republicans initiated a motion to table the resolution, thereby suspending the deliberation of the impeachment articles. The motion passed with bipartisan support, concluding the initiative, according to Fox News.
Twenty-three Democrats collaborated with Republicans to vote in favor of dismissing the impeachment measure. A significant faction of Democrats also cast “present” votes, encompassing all three leaders of the party: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), and Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.).
Impeachment is a constitutional mechanism intended to hold a corrupt executive accountable for abuses of power, legal infractions, and breaches of public trust. The endeavor typically necessitates a thorough investigative procedure, the accumulation and analysis of numerous documents, meticulous examination of the facts, interrogation of multiple key witnesses, Congressional hearings, persistent public mobilization, and the orchestration of democratic forces to establish a wide national consensus,” the trio articulated in a statement elucidating their vote.
None of the substantive work has been accomplished, as the Republican majority has concentrated exclusively on endorsing Donald Trump’s radical agenda. Consequently, we will cast a ‘present’ vote on today’s motion to table the impeachment resolution as we persist in our efforts to enhance affordability for ordinary Americans.
The conclusive vote was 237 in favor and 140 against, with 47 members recorded as “present,” as noted by Fox.
Among the Democrats who voted to suspend the measure are Representatives. According to the outlet, Tom Suozzi, D-N.Y., Josh Riley, D-N.Y., Jared Golden, D-Maine, Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif., Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H., Sharice Davids, D-Kan., Don Davis, D-N.C., Shomari Figures, D-Ala., among others, were mentioned.
"""My husband brought his mistress to our daughter’s wedding—and then asked me to give her my seat beside him.
"""My husband brought his mistress to our daughter’s wedding—and then asked me to give her my seat beside him. For a few seconds, I honestly thought I was looking at the wrong table, because my name card had vanished and Melissa’s was sitting exactly where mine had been on every seating chart. She wore a pale blue silk dress, lifted her champagne as if she belonged there, and avoided my eyes when I stopped beside the chair. David stood up, pointed to an empty seat at the next table, and quietly said, “For tonight, why don’t you sit over there?”
I had spent fourteen months helping our daughter, Emily, plan that wedding, from dress fittings and florist meetings to late-night calls over napkins and seating charts. That morning, while I fastened the pearl buttons on her gown, she made me promise I would enjoy the day and not let anything between her father and me touch it. I meant that promise, because whatever was left of my marriage, I would not make my daughter’s wedding the battlefield where it died. But David had apparently made a different plan, and he expected me to cooperate with it in silence.
When I asked what Melissa was doing there, David’s face showed guilt for only a second before he hid it behind irritation. He acted as though I were creating the problem simply by noticing that his mistress was seated at the family table in the place reserved for the bride’s mother. Then Melissa looked at me and said, “Honey, today really isn’t the day to make Emily uncomfortable.” I almost laughed, because the woman who had been sleeping with my husband for nearly a year was now warning me not to embarrass my own daughter.
I could feel people settling into nearby seats, laughing and talking, unaware that my marriage was being quietly rearranged in front of them. David kept his voice low and told me we should not “do this here,” as if the humiliation belonged to me because I refused to disappear politely. I looked at the empty chair he had chosen for me between a cousin and someone from the groom’s side, and I realized something colder than anger. This was not spontaneous; he had thought about where Melissa would sit, and he had assumed I would move.
For twenty-eight years, I had been the woman who adjusted, explained, forgave, and made excuses when David forgot anniversaries, missed dinners, or put work ahead of family. When he became distant, I learned to expect less instead of asking for more, and somewhere along the way he mistook that patience for permission. Even now, part of me considered taking the other chair, smiling for photographs, swallowing the humiliation, and telling myself it was all for Emily. I actually reached for the chair because protecting my daughter still mattered more to me than winning a public fight.
Then I heard one word behind me: “Mom?” Emily was walking toward us in her wedding dress, still glowing from the ceremony, and at first she looked confused rather than angry. Her eyes moved from me, to the empty chair, to Melissa, then back to the family table where she had personally placed me months ago. David quickly stepped in and announced that he had “rearranged a few things,” as if changing the bride’s seating chart without permission were no more serious than moving a centerpiece.
Emily asked why I was not sitting in my seat, and David casually pointed to the neighboring table and said I would be sitting “right there.” Her smile disappeared, and her eyes dropped to the place card in front of Melissa. I watched my daughter’s expression go completely still as she picked up that card and turned it over in her hand. In that instant, I understood the worst part: Emily had not approved this, and David had brought his mistress into our daughter’s wedding believing he could force everyone to accept what he wanted once it was already done.
What Emily did not know was that six months earlier, I had discovered David’s affair through a message that appeared on his phone while he was in the shower. Melissa had written, “I hate pretending I don’t miss you when she’s around,” followed by another message asking whether Friday was still theirs. When I confronted him, David spent eleven minutes calling me paranoid, insecure, dramatic, suspicious, and unfair before I repeated Melissa’s words exactly. The silence that followed ended our marriage long before either of us ever said the word divorce.
We had kept the details quiet because Emily was planning her wedding, and I refused to turn her happiest season into a crisis about us. David told me he was “confused,” that what he had with Melissa was “more complicated than an affair,” and that he needed time before making decisions. I agreed only that Emily’s wedding came first, so we slept in separate rooms, spoke carefully, and tried to appear functional while our marriage quietly collapsed. I believed David understood that one day required restraint, but he had apparently used that silence to prepare something else.
Three weeks before the wedding, he had casually asked whether Emily had finalized the family table and whether every seat had been assigned. At the time, I thought it was harmless conversation, but standing there with Melissa’s card in my daughter’s hand, I finally understood why he had asked. He had been checking whether there would be room, and when there was not, he simply removed me. Emily looked up at her father and asked, very quietly, “Where is Mom’s place card?”—and for the first time that night, David had no easy answer.
…FULL STORY IN THE COMMENT 👇👇👇"" "
