[Goose]

I can certainly understand somebody in the executive branch taking issue with some wording somewhere in a CDC document and wanting to make changes. Normally, in a "sane" organization, there would be a meeting, things would get worked out, and the document would be issued. It may be that the changes didn't totally please the CDC but they wouldn't substantially alter the content of the statement. Suppressing the statement is the worst of both worlds, because there is no "compromise" statement and the original then leaks out. Dumb and dumber.

---

If Biden wins the POTUS election in November, the number of laws passed to limit Executive Branch power will make our heads spin. Some significant new restrictions and requirements are going to be implemented. 

I really doubt you are correct. Whichever party is in the White House won't want that. They want to use that power to "get things done". Congress  itself really doesn't want the responsibility of actually making real decisions. Then they could be forced into having no choice but to do something that would be politically unpopular, and they simply won't do that.

Experience has shown that there is no substitute for competent leadership. You cannot ensure good governance by substituting process for competence. Many nations have repeatedly tried to pass laws that prevent bad governance. Generally these attempts have simply made things more difficult without actually preventing bad leadership from doing great damage. The founding fathers actually had it right. Rely on the government as little as humanly possible, because government is hard. In the modern world, we expect a lot more from our government than they did in 1789. Unfortunately, we have not radically improved our governments ability to meet those expectations. That is a big issue.

[Goose]

I can certainly understand somebody in the executive branch taking issue with some wording somewhere in a CDC document and wanting to make changes. Normally, in a "sane" organization, there would be a meeting, things would get worked out, and the document would be issued. It may be that the changes didn't totally please the CDC but they wouldn't substantially alter the content of the statement. Suppressing the statement is the worst of both worlds, because there is no "compromise" statement and the original then leaks out. Dumb and dumber.

---

If Biden wins the POTUS election in November, the number of laws passed to limit Executive Branch power will make our heads spin. Some significant new restrictions and requirements are going to be implemented. 

I really doubt you are correct. Whichever party is in the White House won't want that. They want to use that power to "get things done". Congress  itself really doesn't want the responsibility of actually making real decisions. Then they could be forced into having no choice but to do something that would be politically unpopular, and they simply won't do that.

Experience has shown that there is no substitute for competent leadership. You cannot ensure good governance by substituting process for competence. Many nations have repeatedly tried to pass laws that prevent bad governance. Generally these attempts have simply made things more difficult without actually preventing bad leadership from doing great damage. The founding fathers actually had it right. Rely on the government as little as humanly possible, because government is hard. In the modern world, we expect a lot more from our government than they did in 1789. Unfortunately, we have not radically improved our governments ability to meet those expectations. That is a big issue.