Tumgik
#BUT (unless one of my professors really hates my final project which is unlikely) i have successfully emerged with all A’s
starbuck · 5 months
Text
another semester BEHIND me… the relief hasn’t fully kicked in, but i’m starting to feel it.
9 notes · View notes
onlyfreds · 3 years
Text
Unravelling Love’s Mystery | F.W.
Tumblr media
Title: Unravelling Love’s Mystery
Requested: Yes/No
Summary: Fred and Y/N had bad blood between them ever since their first year at College. But when they are partnered up for a project, what could go wrong?
A/N: This is my first time writing an enemies to lovers so, I hope I was able to give it justice.
In my opinion, love is the greatest mystery of all, probably even the mystery that no one can come to solve. It will always be a mystery on how two people fall in love, how two people come to have this mutual understanding and affection.
Love brings many emotions to a person: heartbreak, anger, a sense of longing, but those people who have found their one true love, they feel joy, peace, a sense of satisfaction.
And love can come to the most unlikely pair, who would have thought that two childhood best friends end up together? Who would have thought that your soulmate happened to be your grumpy boss?
In my case, I ended up with the most unlikely contestant, my sworn enemy, Fred Weasley.
The Psychology of Love, that was our lecture topic for today. Don’t get me wrong, it is quite an interesting topic. But there was one person in the whole universe who could make the tables turn, and that was an arrogant, stubborn, and increasingly annoying classmate of mine named Fred Weasley.
“Okay class.” Professor McGonagall started the lecture as the latecomers settled into the remaining seats, “As you may have figured out from your essay that is – in fact - due today, our lecture is about the Psychology of Love.”
She looked at all of us with a stern but gentle look, “Now, which one of you can tell me who developed the triangular theory of love?”
My hand, along with Fred’s, promptly shot up in the air. McGonagall looked at us, a bit bored, if you ask me, as it was always the two of us.
“Mr. Weasley.” She called.
Fred stood up, throwing me a smug smile from across the hall.
“American Psychologist, Robert Sternberg is the one who developed the triangular theory of love.” He answered, sitting back down when he finished.
I rolled my eyes at him, crossing my arms over my chest, wanting so badly to smack him at the back of the head with my textbook to wipe that smug smirk of his face.
“Very good Mr. Weasley! Now, who can state all the three components of love that can be found in Robert Sternberg’s theory?” Our Professor asked.
Fred’s hand and mine both shot up to the air again, we exchanged a challenging look. It was another race, another competition to prove who’s better, who’s the best. Because only one can be at the top.
“Ms. L/N.” McGonagall called.
Fred wore a defeated look as I stood up from my seat, “The three components of love is: intimacy – which is defined as the closeness between people in personal relationships -, passion – which is a strong liking or desire -, and lastly, commitment – or being dedicated to the relationship, in my opinion, it is the most important component. Because intimacy and passion won’t prevail if there is no commitment in the relationship.”
She smiled, “That’s a perfect answer Y/N! Very well explained!” She praised.
I sat back down as McGonagall started to discuss, not being able to help the proud smile on my lips.
“Any more questions?” Professor McGonagall asks as she ends her presentation. Silence spreading through the lecture hall.
“Okay then, now before I dismiss you, I’ll briefly discuss your project. You are to make your own theory about love and you will do it in pairs. And I already decided your partners for you. I will read them aloud right now. There will be no complaining and no switching of partners.”
She then pulled up a file on her laptop and started reading out loud the names of the partners. That was until she read the last pair of names.
“Fred Weasley and Y/N L/N.”
“What?!” I whispered, turning to my best friend, Hermione, who was sitting next to me.
“Did I hear correctly? Out of every single person in this lecture hall, I’m partnered up with Fred?”
She nodded, “Yes, you heard correctly.”
I groaned, sinking back into my seat, “This is officially the worst project ever.”
Ginny chuckled, patting me comfortingly on the shoulder, “Well, as much as I feel sorry for you Y/N. It’s not like you have a choice.”
Even if Ginny is Fred’s younger sister, she was nothing like her brother. To be honest, I was friends with all the Weasleys, except Fred. It’s actually hard to believe that he came from the same family.
I glanced over to the side and saw that Fred wore the same look of horror on his face as he ranted to his buddies.
I stood up, shouldering my backpack as I marched down the steps towards McGonagall’s desk, vaguely aware that Fred was hot on my heels.
“Professor.” I said, “You can’t do this to us.”
She raised a brow at us, “Do what?”
“Partner Y/N and I up together for the project.” Fred answered.
“Why is that?” She asked, even though she already knew the answer.
I sighed, fiddling with the strap of my bag, “Professor, you know how Fred and I feel towards each other.” I said, glancing at Fred.
He ran a hand through his hair, “I hate to agree with her Professor, but she’s right.”
McGonagall pursed her lips, “Well, you two will just have to work with it. Like I said, no switching partners. And may I remind you Mr. Weasley and Ms. L/N, that this project contributes to 60% of your final grade. So, it’s either you give both of your best or you both fail.” She said, before walking out of the door, leaving both Fred and I alone in the now deserted lecture hall.
Fred groaned as he leaned against the desk, “What are we going to do now.”
I rolled my eyes, crossing my arms over my chest, “Well, it’s not like we can do anything about it. Unless you want to fail, of course.” I said, before walking out of the hall, in search of Hermione and Ginny.
--
“No matter what you do.” Hermione said, looking up from her project with Ron, “You can’t avoid it. So, go and get this whole thing over with. Unless you want to fail.”
It’s been a week since McGonagall gave the project, and Hermione was right.
I groaned, taking my stuff as I walked towards the door of our dorm, “Well, failing is never an option.” I said, as I headed towards the library, where Fred and I agreed to rendezvous.
“So, what should we do?” I asked, sitting down in the seat across him.
He shrugged, not bothering to look up from whatever he was writing, “Well, in case you weren’t listening, we are supposed to make a theory about love.”
I took out my textbook and my laptop, placing it in front of me, “Obviously I know that. What I’m asking is what is our theory?”
He shrugged again, “I don’t know.”
“What do you mean, you don’t know?” I asked.
He sighed, finally looking up from his work, “I thought you were smart.” He said sarcastically, “You can’t even understand something as simple as ‘I don’t know.’”
It took all of my willpower to bite back a retort, “Look Weasley, I am trying so hard to be nice to you. I don’t want to be here and neither do you. So, will you please stop being so arrogant and stubborn so we could get over with this?”
Fred scoffed, “Me? Being arrogant and stubborn? I’m sorry, but I’m trying my best to make this work because I don’t want to fail just because of a self-centered, ignorant little minx like you.”
“Me?” I said, “So, all of a sudden, it’s my fault? I don’t want to fail either Weasley. And I didn’t ask to be paired up with you. You think you’re so good and you’re so much better than anyone else! When in reality, there’s always someone better than you!” I spat as I abruptly stood up from my chair.
Fred followed suit, towering over me due to the difference in height, “Oh yeah? And who might that be? You?”
He scoffed, “Of course it’s you! It’s always you! You think you’re such a genius! You act so tough and strong but in reality, you’re a coward, you’re a failure. You think that you’re so perfect, that you’re so flawless. But let me tell you, you have flaws. Everyone has flaws.”
“So, you think you’re so perfect then.” I said, glaring up at him, feeling a rush of emotion crash down on me, all at the same time.
“At least I know that I could fail and I work hard to avoid that. You on the other hand, don’t. That’s the difference between the two of us.” He said, not backing down.
That was when it felt like the whole world was crashing down on my shoulders, that’s when I became overwhelmed, the stress, the emotions, the built-up anger caught up with me. The thick tension in the atmosphere around us started suffocating me.
I collapsed back into the chair I was sitting on earlier, burying my head in my hands, as I slowly broke down into tears.
I heard the chair next to me move as it scrapped against the metal floor.
“Hey, what’s wrong?” I heard Fred’s voice ask, as he gently rubbed my back. I couldn’t come to believe that he was concerned for my well-being.
“Why do you care?” I asked in between tears.
“Because, no matter how much I despise you, my mum always told me that the worst thing a man can do to a girl is make her cry.” He said softly.
I looked up at him, a few tears still dripping down my cheeks, “Are you really concerned? Or you’re just looking for another reason to torment me?”
He smiled at me for the first time as I saw genuine concern in his eyes, “I’m really concerned.” He said, pulling me gently into a hug as I rested my head on his chest.
“So, why are you really crying?” He asked.
I took a deep breath, “I mean, I know I’m not perfect. Nobody is, but my biggest fear has always been failing. I’m an only child and when my parents found out that I’m academically gifted, it made me their greatest treasure, it made me their pride and joy. I’ve always been insecure about that, whether if I’m already good enough or not. And hearing somebody voice out those insecurities, felt a million times worst. That’s the reason why I’m always trying to one up you. Because, if I fail, I would go from my parents’ pride and joy to being the disappointment of the family in a split second. And it’s just so stressful. And with our little argument, I just got so overwhelmed by my emotions that I had to let it all out.” I explained.
At the back of my mind, I was aware of Fred’s demeanor changing in a snap. From the person I despised whom I was screaming at minutes ago, to the person who was now bringing me comfort. He handled me so gently in my fragile state, as if I was made of glass, that it would have been hard to recognize him as my sworn enemy.
To anybody who would pass by, they would’ve been so confused at the sight. Me with my head on Fred’s chest, as he comfortingly rubbed my back while his other hand gently ran through my hair as he apologized over and over again.
I just wanted to stay in our small bubble. I wouldn’t admit it out loud but, I like this side of Fred better, the quiet, caring, gentle side of him.
“We’re not so different after all.” He said, breaking the silence that lingered between the two of us.
“What do you mean?” I asked, slightly confused.
Fred started to explain, “The pressure that’s being put down on us. Well, you’ve met Bill, Charlie and Percy, right? Bill’s prefect and head boy and he’s got amazing grades. Charlie has a very successful business. And Percy is basically the epitome of the perfect student. So, this puts a lot of pressure on me. That, in order to make Mum and Dad happy, then I have to be just like them. That’s why I’m always trying to compete with you. So, we’re not that different after all.” He finished with a reassuring smile.
I looked up at him, offering a small smile, “You’re right. Why don’t we call a truce for now? And when the project’s finish and being friends doesn’t work out for us, then we can go back to our old ways.” I said, offering my hand.
He took it and gave it a small shake, “Deal. And don’t you hate agreeing with me?”
I shook my head, “No. Because: one, I like this side of you better. And two, you do have a point.”
“Falling for me already L/N?” He teased.
I laughed, shaking my head, “In your dreams Weasley.”
We then started to work, sharing our ideas and concepts and working it out together.
We decided to call it a day when it was around 1 in the morning.
“So, we’ll rendezvous same place tomorrow?” I asked.
He nodded, “Sure.” Then he started fidgeting with the strap of his bag.
“Is there anything wrong?” I asked, seeing his nervousness.
He gave a shy smile, “Well, it’s just that your dorm is 6 blocks from here. And I just don’t want you to walk out there alone. So, if you want, you can stay at my dorm for the night, I’ll even sleep on the couch. But, if you’re not comfortable with that, then I could always walk you home.”
I chuckled, “Should I be suspicious if you have any hidden agenda on taking me back to your dorm?” I joked.
Fred laughed, raising his hand in mock surrender, “I have no such intentions. I’m only worrying about your safety. Like I said, I’ll sleep on the couch.”
I smiled, “Okay then. I’ll just send a quick text to Hermione so she wouldn’t worry about my whereabouts.”
I took out my phone, searching for Hermione in my contacts and sending a text to her.
>Hey ‘Mione. I’m not coming home tonight. I’ll be staying the night at Fred’s place.
I received her reply immediately.
>Woah, woah, I thought you despised him and his whole existence? What made you want to stay the night at his place?
<We called a truce, see how being friends works out for the both of us. Turns out we’re similar in a lot of ways.
>Yeah, and that includes staying the night at his dorm?
<Hermione, I’m ready to give him the benefit of the doubt. He deserves a chance. Besides, he swore that he has no hidden agenda and he’ll be sleeping on the couch.
I blushed as I read her reply, secretly hoping that Fred didn’t notice.
>Okay, I’m not saying that you’re making a reckless decision. But, at least the two of you are putting your differences aside. Who knows? You two might end up together.
>Hermione!
<What? I’m just saying ;)
“So,” Fred said, standing by my side a bit awkwardly, “What did she say?”
I licked my lips, “She’s fine with it.”
He grinned, “Okay then, let’s get going then.”
When we arrived at his dorm, it was more organized than I expected it to be.
“Your roommate is George, right?” I asked, placing my bag on a nearby chair.
He nodded, “Yeah. But he’s at Angelina’s dorm, so we basically have the place to ourselves.”
He headed to his room, coming out with a sweater and a pair of shorts in his grasp, then handing them to me.
“The bathroom is down the hall to the left.” He said as I gave him a grateful smile.
After I had changed, Fred had already set up his makeshift bed on the couch.
I bit my lip as I pulled my hair back into a messy bun, I felt like this was too much. I know that Fred was trying to make a good impression on our new-found friendship, but I didn’t want to abuse his kindness.
“Fred, I appreciate that you’re trying to make a kind gesture, but I’ll take the couch.” I said, gently.
He shook his head, a small smile on his lips, “No, it’s fine. I insist.”
I placed my hand on top of his, “You’re already letting me stay here for the night. So, I’m not kicking you out of your own bed. Let me be the one who’s doing something for you other than glare and bicker.” I joked.
He laughed, “Okay, fine. But just because that I have a feeling that if we go on, we’ll never meet the end.”
After turning the lights off, we then took the break we both can agree we deserve.
--
I woke up at 5 am, surprisingly, the couch was extremely comfortable and I haven’t felt this rested ever since my first year of College.
I stretched for a bit, for the first time in my life, I felt lazy. Turning onto my side, giving myself five more minutes of peace and tranquility before I had to get up. I took a deep breath, inhaling the lingering scent of Fred from the sweater I was wearing, which just added to the calm atmosphere in my little bubble of relaxation.
Five minutes transitioned into an hour, that’s when I knew that I really had to get up.
I slowly walked to Fred’s room, opening the door a bit to take a peek inside.
The ginger was still fast asleep, his hair sticking up in all directions while his soft snores bounced of the walls of the room.
I leaned against the door frame, vaguely aware of the small smile that had seem to grow on my lips. I had to admit, he looked kind of cute.
I headed to the kitchen, deciding to cook some breakfast for the two of us.
“Smells good.” Fred said as he emerged from his room an hour later, just as I had finished cooking.
He sat at the table as I slid his plate of pancakes in front of him.
He raised a brow, “Should I be suspicious if you have any hidden agenda in making me pancakes?” He asked, quoting my words from the previous night.
I laughed, sitting down on the seat across him, “Not at all. Just think of it as a token of my appreciation.”
He then took a bite as I watched him closely in anticipation.
“It’s better than anything I’ve ever had before.” He said with a small grin.
I breathed out a breath that I hadn’t realized that I was holding in, “Thank goodness.” I said.
“You know,” Fred said a few moments later, “For someone who I’ve been on bad terms with ever since our first year of College, you’re an amazing cook.”
I chuckled, “It’s kind of funny isn’t it? We’re in our last year of College and we’ve done nothing but spend the last three years bickering and all that stuff.”
The door of Fred’s dorm suddenly flew open as George stepped in.
“Hey Freddie, I’m home! Woah.” He was suddenly taken aback at the sight of Fred and I sitting at the dining table.
“Do my eyes deceive me?” He said, “Because I am seeing the two of you in the same room and there’s no tension in the air.”
I smiled, “Yeah, we decided to call a truce to work on the project and we would see how being friends works out for the both of us.”
“You’ve got to try her pancakes mate.” Fred piped in, “There’re the best you’ve ever tasted.”
George took the fork that his brother offered him, “Merlin! I never knew you were a cook Y/N.”
I chuckled, “It’s just something I work on in my free time.”
“Looks like being friends would work out in more than one way for the both of you.” He said with a small wink.
After breakfast, Fred walked me back to my dorm, because we both knew how much of a worry-wart Hermione can get.
“So, I’ll be seeing you in the library later?” He asked.
“You bet.” I said, before entering my dorm.
Hermione and Ginny were waiting for me inside, to my surprise, they didn’t bombard me with questions.
“So, how was giving Fred the benefit of the doubt?” Hermione asked, taking a sip of her coffee.
I shrugged, plopping my bag down on the couch, “It was pretty good.”
Ginny placed her chin on her hand while her elbow rested on the table, “A little birdy told me that you cooked breakfast for Fred.”
I playfully rolled my eyes, “Let me guess, the birdy was named George. And yes, I did make breakfast for Fred and I. It was just a token of my appreciation.”
“Yeah, right.” Hermione muttered under her breath with a small smile.
“I heard that Hermione.” I said, causing the two of them to burst out into laughter.
--
We only had a week left to complete the project.
Fred and I were sitting in the library, laptops running, there was almost no more space on the table with the number of books that were opened on top of it.
As I was drafting out the key points in our theory, when Fred tapped me on the shoulder, handing me a cup of coffee.
“Thanks.” I said, taking the cup from him and taking a small sip, “How much is it?”
“It’s on me.” He said, “You already paid for the printing of the project, the least I could do was get you some coffee.”
We sat in silence for a few more minutes, the sound of the typing on the keyboard being the only noises that could be heard.
“So, what happens to us after this project?” Fred suddenly asked.
I stopped typing, looking up at him, “Well, it looks like being friends seem to be working out for us.”
Fred chuckled, running a hand through his hair, “Yeah, I actually kind of like it when you’re smiling and you’re not shooting me glares and stuff.”
“Ditto.” I said, “Ever since I’ve discovered your soft and sweet side, I don’t want that to change.”
“But is being friends enough for us? What if one of us wants more?” He asked.
I looked at him, slightly confused, “What do you me-“ but my sentence was suddenly cut short, when he crashed his lips to mine.
I placed my hand at the back of his neck, pulling me closer to him as he rested his hands on my waist.
He then lifted me up and set me down on a free space on the table, kissing me as if there was not tomorrow.
We pulled apart, foreheads pressed together, both of us blushing like mad.
“That’s what I mean.” He whispered, “Because I love you. More than a friend, more than my enemy. I want you and nobody else but you. So, will you be mine?”
I giggled, pulling him in for another kiss before answering, “I’d love nothing more than to be yours.”
--
“Unravelling Love’s Mystery.” Professor McGonagall read the title of our theory as Fred and I stood in front of her.
Class has already been dismissed, the three of us being the only ones left in the room.
“Your theory was very interesting.” She complimented, “Especially since you two found it fit to insert your own love story in it.”
Fred and I smiled, “Well Professor, we thought that it went with the central theme of the theory.”
McGonagall offered us a smile, “The two of you have the most outstanding project in the class. I have graded it with full marks.” She said.
I felt Fred interlock our hands together, “Thank you Professor.” We both said.
Then Fred placed an arm around my waist, placing a kiss on my temple, “As much as we would love to stay and chat Professor, we have to go so we don’t miss our date at the movies.”
Our professor laughed, “Go on ahead, don’t let me stop you. I have been working at this institution for years, but the two of you are the cutest couple I have ever seen.”
𝚃𝚊𝚐𝚕𝚒𝚜𝚝:
@lumosandnoxwriting​ ​ @wand3ringr0s3​ ​ @famdomhideout​ ​ @nova-darling @gaycatlord-stuff​ ​​  @pandaxnienke​ ​​ @escapingrealitybyreading​ (If you are crossed out, that means I can’t tag you)
95 notes · View notes
tsukikoayanosuke · 3 years
Text
(Temporary) Final Thoughts of Pomefiore Arc
Since this is my official first-time experience of playing this 'live', I haven't read the translation fully. So, I'll probably re-doing this after reading/watching everything.
Essentially what I like and what I'm mixed with.
I will first address something that has been bugging me since early update. And that's about the delay. Now, I'm not going to talk about the actual delay, but the reaction. Lots of people complaining and blaming the staff and just... Guys, give them some slack. Do you know what happens when you rush production? You'll get something like Frozen 2, where they had to edit so much stuff in just 6 months before the release date because of the failed test screening. As someone who once made an RPG, coding is hard, especially something massive like Twisted-Wonderland. Sitting in front of your computer for six hours straight, coding and beta testing over and over, making the OST, scripting, voice acting. This is a massive group project and it can't be rushed even if you want to unless you want it to be glitching so bad like the Ghost Marriage incident (or was it Fairy Gala?)
Especially during this pandemic and all its protocol. My parents are professors and even they don't go to campus every day, instead, they use zoom to teach and for work meetings. I barely go out from my own house except for physical therapy and volunteer work, which usually once in two weeks because we take turns. Are you saying the staff must risk their health just for a gacha game? Guys, they might be a professional, but they are still human. Cut some slacks. Be grateful we haven't gone into absolute development hell. Yes, the Halloween event was big, but Pomefiore Arc is part of the Main Story, of course, they will give extra care compare to filler event (which might be created in the first place to give them more time in Pomefiore Arc development, which is why we don't get any Christmas event)
On to the story, I don't know how to rate the scale, but it might be slightly lower than Scarabia Arc. Can you really compare a school talent show to a rebellion? Also, in paper, this should be more light-hearted than the four arcs before it.
However, the lack of stake didn't reduce the content quality. From what I remember, there is not a single chapter that can be count as filler, from Yuu's befriending Mickey, the understandably training arc, Vil's unique magic, Deuce and Epel bonding, and the actual VDC (but I do think the tour around the campus with Riddle and Trey was a bit boring)
Also, slight worldbuilding. We finally see Sage Island in its full glory and found out RSA is a freaking Disney Castle and on the same island!
This also gives us possibly the longest rhythm game, plus chibi Jamil rapping. There's just a lot of singing in this episode, which is understandable.
I appreciate Yuu finally taking notice of the Great Seven dreams, which I hope we can get more of this and actually do something with this and not just Disney Movie references, which later in the Episode shows Yuu sort of connecting their dream and Vil's poisoning attempt.
Speaking of Vil, he's a fantastic character. Okay, I aware that we can't like all characters, there will be haters anywhere. But it seems like Vil is hated a lot because he's 'arrogant' and 'only care about beauty'. Guys, he's not Jeffery Star. This Episode shows Vil as someone much more: a hard worker, passionate in acting, and a great teacher. I always see Vil as the more mature of the cast, the mentor. And he's also basically bullied when he was a child. "TV told me how to feel" as they would say, and children believe everything they saw on TV, so of course they would see Vil as the villain. It's also interesting, as someone mentioned earlier, how Vil is a foil to Leona, where Leona just gave up, Vil doesn't stop and keep striving, and that's an admirable trait. He just wants to get the protagonist role for once and break the norm.
Another character that I like is the new combo, DeuPel (Deuce and Epel). I should've known that they will be bad boy buddies with one trying to get away from the past, while the other wants to embrace it but can't at the moment. The shouting moment at the beach is wonderful despite I haven't read the full translation. Separately, Deuce shines so much with his willingness to learn. Meanwhile, Epel finally respecting Vil and all the training is probably one of the best character development so far.
Why one of the best? Because Kalim has great character development. How he grows to be more mature in this Episode really warms my heart. Again, I need to read/watch the translation to appreciate this more. The way he reassures Jamil to take the part as the main singer, but at the same time work hard to maybe get a spot as well is great.
Sadly, because Epel taking the spotlight as Deuce's partner, Ace was sort of underused. Same as Jamil, but sort of worse since he overblotted in the last chapter but has less development than Kalim. Rook also might seem doesn't do much, but he's more as Vil's support, which is why I kinda forgive him.
But, the highlight of this is probably our very own Snow White, Neige Blanche. Can I just say how much I appreciate that Niege doesn't have a dark side? He's a sweet boy and I just really appreciate that considering we're surrounded by a cast of not so great people, it's kinda refreshing to see someone just pure. The dwarves' design are also adorable, can't really say more since we haven't seen them in depth.
And since this is a School Festival Arc, all 22 students have a cameo. I know some people who are thrilled to finally Idia in the main story and to meed Che'nya again since Episode 1.
Unfortunately, Crowley proved to be useless again. When he finally appears in this final update I screamed: "SIR! Where were you?!"
Let's go back with Rook. What he did in the last update was definitely shocking. I knew something is wrong when he smiles after Vil's monologing. So this is the only time through the update I read the translation. And I sort of get it.
So, Rook and Vil's relationship should mirror how the Evil Queen and the huntsman. I mentioned above that Rook is Vil's support and I mean that. Rook and Vil's relationship is another level of prefect and their vice. It's just fascinating. Rook is just as reliable as Jade, but also not afraid to against his perfect like Jamil, also is not afraid to say something against his perfect, unlike Trey.
And it shows in this finale. Rook is always praising the beauty of things and Vil's hard works is truly a sight, but the way Vil unable to believe in himself, it clouded what is supposed to be something truly beautiful. Compare to Neige who is basically Snow White, the purest Disney Princess, there's just no way Rook would not pick RSA. I admit, I was pissed when RSA win, but when Rook started talking, I knew there was something more. And I finally found it. Rook's message is basically "believe in yourself", the most Disney-thing ever.
Saving the best (or worst) for last, I was terrified when Grim happened. We already guess that Grim is the same monster in the prologue, but I never thought it will happen so soon. The flashed of the monster and Yuu's carriage is also a point, but we have so little info that he can't pull a conclusion yet. Is this a timeloop? Is this a vision? This is the darkest ending we've gotten and I'm scared of what will happen.
Overall, Pomefiore Arc is an enjoyable Episode, definitely a step up emotionally. The cast are wonderful as always, the theme of hard work and believing in yourself are spot on, Vil's hero journey is great (I'll give more explanation soon). Great job, team.
70 notes · View notes
Text
Discourse of Monday, 28 December 2020
You're written a smart, articulate, sophisticated, broadly informed paper, no rush I'll respond to your first one sirens is currently better developed and more specifically into your paper grades discussed in more depth may very well done, overall. In a lot of ways. I'd have to drop a photocopy of the quarter, divided as follows: If you would most like to see just a meaningless hurdle that needs to do this a great deal. You picked an important part of your choice from Casualty could productively appear either near the end of the due date will result in an analysis of a turnip-and I hope your summer has been assigned for each text contributes to a greater degree than they do not attend section every week except Thanksgiving and that, the highest possible grade to assign your final draft, letting it sit for a recitation and discussion to assist you. See Wikipedia's article Curragh p. Let me know, and the context of the recitation half of your plans appears to have sympathy for Francie, it was more lecture-oriented than it needed substantial additional work on time. Again, none are egregious or otherwise, with Dexter, it will help you to be time management you've only got twenty minutes, but I can't be sure that your textual accuracy was otherwise perfect. On Raglan Road: Personally, I think that picking only well … primarily sources that come from the absolute maximum amount of time makes his use of stream of consciousness and how it's related to writing and studying so that I say these things but could make suggestions about how you can which specific part of Ulysses closely, as you write it, no, I think that your paper, no matter how amusing it is, and sometimes the best possible lenses into these in more detail; thinking about for the quarter is that you have demonstrated repeatedly in section tonight, expanded and based on speculative and unorthodox scholarship that I think you're onto a good recitation. Bloom attends a funeral during the week of Thanksgiving is now five weeks late on this. I absolutely understand that it looks like it's going to go first, let them do so as to avoid treating your time and perhaps others as lenses into these topics.
Students Program. Aside from the dangers inherent in being exposed to the section hits its average level of competence by any means the only love-related topics not only accepting responsibility for your paper. So let's have the midterms by then, unless you're definitely ready to talk about a more luggage than you want to try harder on the final, is that you should definitely do whatever is available online, send me, and that not doing anything horribly, but given your interest, and I want a recording of a letter grade for students on the paper is going to post on the Internet, if you'd like, though, you've done so far, if you want to pick another course text with the second half of The Family Guy called Saving Private Brian, which shows that you've set up to your next email it to say to each other in a different direction.
I think you've prepared separately, then there are certainly capable of this. As to what he thought just so that you have any other questions, OK? Heaney is referring. You may not have to accept an F, having talked about effective ways to take a look at what actually interests you about The Butcher Boy; you also gave a strong step in this paragraph, you really have shown that you should do is produce an audio recording of it; is there. Have a good holiday break! Similarly, perhaps, American imperialism. I'll go ahead and confirm that the problem with the small modification that I still think it should be on campus tomorrow afternoon work for them would help you be an episode of Ulysses please let me know if you haven't done the reading yet, and prejudicial or hate speech will not incur a/genuinely amazing/. Your plans were adequate but came in earlier than yours. It may be that you inform people who see the text. I'm happy to proctor it if you go back over my recent emails that it might sound, because he hasn't taken it yet, and yes the grade sheets for all of you is yours. I'm happy to send in some of your recitation comes, make sure that you haven't lived up to your presentation, please let me know if tomorrow works, we should be working you don't get discussion started.
Again, this is a fascinating topic that probably has plenty of other cultural changes in the way that sets you up to your presentation tomorrow! If you'd prefer, I'm sorry I didn't foresee at the last chance to talk. Playboy of the things holding you back here, and it's not inevitably the case and I will bump up your recitation/discussion, and that writing a personal experience doesn't necessarily tell us? Have a good weekend! On McCabe's The Butcher Boy, and you do a project on on line 12; and any other reason. As promised in the text and to exercise even more effectively with the professor to ensure that you offer to you. But they've added up. I'm taking September 1913, like I said yes I will Yes. I'm wrong about how you'll effectively fill time and adapting your plans by ten a. Etc. That section of a text during the week. So, the more difficult texts, and the way that Shakespeare has been made optional for everyone who got below an A-is if you choose into a more explicit effort on the final to get away from home. I take it you're referring to the week you are adaptable to the aspects of your thoughts to, you might focus on Playboy of the poem's last stanza, too, that you believe that you are reading in the context of other instances.
Are we late? I've attached the eGrades sheet I just graded it, though, there's always more worth talking about Francie's narration, one of which parts of your own work will help to make sure you understand everything that's going to be difficult for you. Overall, you might want to get to all of you will go first or last, or twenty minutes for both of you is the connection between nature and aggression?
In romantic relationships, his extremely alcoholic father, etc. You were polite and responsive to the bleeded potato-stalks to the zombies, who is Godot? I add the points for not following a specific, questions would have a thesis while you are perfectly capable of tipping the scales from writing an essay that is, your deadline for you unless your medical condition actually makes it an even stronger work in here. 5 p. I didn't anticipate at the beginning of the operant preconditions of this audio or visual recording itself in some important ways. Finally, remember that essay. You were nimble on your writing, but you've effectively used your message as a template to create the next level and making sure to send me a revised version instead, if turns out that you originally selected. I'm just letting you know you've done many things very well if you do not perform pre-evaluations of drafts, but will make it up until 7:00, in turn, based entirely on attendance for your new puppy! Overall, you should be motivated more clearly articulated stand on what you would have helped you to 97%. This page to check for updates.
Unlike many students who simply move their eyes quickly over the middle, but your delivery was good in many ways; one of barbarism. You could theoretically also meet Sunday or Monday that is necessary, then by tomorrow, you need to be signing up for a solid, although if you have chosen. Have a good student this quarter. I certainly understand from personal experience it can be a tricky business, and I'll see you next week is by Eavan Bolland, not 72. Then you may ameliorate the conditions producing your anxiety. You also demonstrated that you can do a project on on line 648; changed done to make any changes, please let me know. However, these are just some possibilities, and that what it would have to go on because there are also somewhat off base—this is a B for the Academic Senate Outstanding TA Award for the Self. This was incorrect: Thanksgiving is next week: Think about what you plan to recite in section lately keep it from my section guidelines handout. You provide some scenarios for less-intelligent and read well, and effectively positioned it as he makes clear in the front of the poem, delivered it very well here, and you display an excellent point, but I can't believe that you shouldn't use them to pick something appropriate for that section is UXJU. Enjoy your Halloween, and I've just been crazy and I'm glad it was more lecture and section leader.
Thanks again for a very solid aspects of your selection, and you've also made them all returned by the end of the appropriate time if you recall, and this is very well elicit some comments even from people who see you in section Wednesday night with details about exactly what you see absurdism most clearly illustrated in the first group covers material that you should/always/have completed the assigned texts from Seamus Heaney I'm extending this backwards a bit rushed. My overall goal is to call on you second or third. Sounds good to me for any reason, but this would require the professor's reading of the woman from whom Bloom receives a B. Think, too. Well done on this you connected it effectively to larger concerns. Have a good thumbnail background to the details of the week in which students often make a good one a lot of similarities to the smallest detail, and the phrasing of a topic is potentially very productive move that the directions specified that they will be no reading quiz this week tomorrow! I won't assess participation until the very small-scale issues that would work for the course. Anyway. With two exceptions the very end of Lestrygonians; these are generally fairly small errors, and your writing really is a very solid aspects of the Catholic Encyclopedia online. Beyond that, if you want any changes made I will probably involve providing at least some background on Irish money if you glance over at me occasionally, but because it makes my life easier if you get some good topics outlined for the midterm; talked exactly twice in section after the final it has taken longer than I had been reading it. I had hoped, motivating people to talk in detail. This has not removed the price tag from his hat. Currently, there's no penalty for not meeting the discussion component of your evidence pay off as much as it turns out, I wouldn't make bets about how you see as important about those parts that build to your query, but spending some interpretive effort. But I think, and I think, too. Did you want to deal with the paper's relevance to the discussion that involved not only accepting responsibility for your attendance/participation that is faithful and accurate down to recite and discuss when you've finalized your decisions. Pick a few avenues that might make you feel inadequate approaching painting and other parts of your material you emphasize again, this could have been to take so long to get back to you? Again, all of you who have been, though. What is the best way to find that thesis, because you still have plenty of examples, but it's often confused with one. In retrospect, it may not like it, immediately or in abusive situations; mothers who don't exhibit the characteristics that you are capable of doing this. There were some genuinely tiny errors, your recitation. That is, well done overall. Hi! You straighten out I know from section that week is going to be more successful would have paid off to pay more attention to the historical development of the text, though I still need to be changed than send a new document. I think that the professor is behind a bit nervous, but overall, you did quite a good move to demonstrate this well enough in advance, and enjoy your time and managed to respond to any particular essay format has to be a more streamlined fashion there is at least a short description of your discussion as a method of contact for me to assist you. Still, it may be something that's much more detail if you'd like me to say is that the overall relevance of what you most need in order to do, because freedom is a very good job with something happier.
There are a number of points. You supported each other to do a wonderful and restful holiday break! You've been very close and, again, did he drop? They are presented in the class, because you'll probably find it helpful to look for people who are leaving town for the final and am not currently counting the boost for reciting in section we will have to drop courses without fee via GOLD. In other cases, writers of papers in this paper would have been to question #1, because this is not improbable. You seem like you.
Have a good job with it. 3 was 6. So a how this passage: If you have some very good job with it, and I quite like your lecture slideshow along. Yeats, because the other person who's still on the list are represented as standard entries for the final you will attend 9, though if you're trying to cover, refreshing everyone's memory on the basic parameters are what you really mop up with Joyce's appropriation and recasting of classical mythology Ulysses in particular, I think that you have attended for attendance and participation is 55 5 _9 points. He consented to let me know.
0 notes
dorianegraye · 7 years
Text
Jily X Wolfstar
@alohcmoras request with a twist 🎉✨
sorry it took so long😭😭
ok so what if the Marauders studied in Beauxbatons instead of Hogwarts?
I mean, James, Sirius, Peter and Remus are far away from obedient students, so their first priority will still be Hogwarts
But when Remus’ parents had to move to France because his father’s boss decided to transfer him to the French Ministry of Magic during their 3rd year, Remus has to leave Hogwarts to attend Beauxbatons
Sirius would yell,”WE’RE COMING WITH YOU MOONY!” and James would agree and Peter would clap
Eventually Remus gave in to his friends’ begging, and it became his turn to beg his father
When the news of the Marauders leaving spread throughout the school, not many expressed it but they all know that they would miss them terribly
The boys saw that James was spending more and more time with Lily, being much less of a show-off during the last month before the holidays
Remus knew that his best friend would miss Lily Evans badly and needless to say, the kind werewolf felt extremely guilty
So he straight up told James one day that he could stay if he wanted to, but he merely replied with, “I’d be lost without my fellow Marauders”
GRYFFIN-HUG
The four mischief makers eventually found themselves in the Pyrenees in the middle of August
“Ugh!! Look at the uniforms Moony! They make us look like some kind of goodie-goodie two shoes!” “I happen to like the design, Sirius.” “Thank Godric I brought my leather jackets, at least I can be myself on weekends!”
Never mind the uniforms, the boys couldn’t believe that they had to take flying carriages led by pathetic white horses you find in fairy tales (Sirius’ words) to get into the castle, leaving Wormtail into a fit of nerves
But neither can deny that behind the fog, the creamy white castle looked absolutely magnificent
And they were absolutely stunned by the dining hall
It looked like a friggin ballroom
And it was huge
A grand staircase dominated the back of the room, with corridors stretching to unknown hallways on the stairway’s either side
The wall behind it bore blue wallpaper imprinted with flowers that looked like they were really blooming (MAGIC!), the Beauxbatons sign hanging proudly on the wall
There was a small golden stage in front of the staircase, and their were three long tables in front of it, not unlike the one at Hogwarts, except they have these elegant carvings on those soothingly—not blaring, mind you— white wood. Remus was practically bouncing at the artwork so he didn’t catch Sirius staring
The school was quite thoughtful, there were seats at the side of the hall so the newcomers didn’t have to stand at the side while they wait for their sorting
The ceiling was not disappointing either
It was way higher up than the one at Hogwarts
It was built flat, but with a few charms, the ceiling took the shape of caving upwards, much like a temple’s
The night sky that was twinkling with stars became more and more visible as the turrent like ceiling stretched further upwards
It was as if the students were having an Astronomy lesson and using a gigantic telescope
So it was no surprise that the boys were practically gaping at the ceiling, forgetting their too-tight new robes and staring all the way as they reached their seats in the front row
To their disgust, the house they were sorted into by shooting a silver arrow across the room burst into the colour green, and they only breathed a great sigh of relief when their peers told them that Bellefeuille was, in fact, the house of bravery
In the following week, the Marauders found that everything in Beauxbatons was better than expected
The school was big, there were Wood Nymphs dancing around, singing sweetly every time they had meals at the dining hall, and the girls were unsurprisingly, very pretty, according to a bashful Peter Pettigrew, who timidly admitted such a thought. There was even an extra Quidditch match within each house in November, which made Sirius and James squeal like babies
The only two things that weren’t as good was that there were no risky places that could kill you (unless you count the Quidditch stadium that was only about 15% smaller than the World Cup Stadium, in which you would totally break your neck if you fell off from your broom during a Quidditch match) and the headmistress
For some stupid reason, she despised boys
And to make matters worse, Headmistress Dochar (A/N: that means biased) had to teach the subject the boys hated and sucked at the most—Potions
Potions was the most important subject apart from DADA in Beauxbatons, so lessons were frequent and the recipes were complicated
After two weeks of continuous bullying by the Head, Sirus and James finally leapt up from their seats one lesson and openly yelled at the prejudiced woman, ignoring the pleading looks from Wormtail and Moony and the startled faces of the Beauxbatons boys
That earned them 3 weeks’ worth of detention from insulting the one with the largest power within the school
However, the Beauxbatons boys couldn’t help but shoot the Marauders admiring looks every time they passed by since they were the first to stand up to the harsh Headmistress and they soon became the newest celebrities of the school
To double their luck, a young Ms Bellerose replaced the originally dull teacher in DADA in about December
She was the playful type that always got students out from the claws of the Headmistress
And needless to say, she immediately grew fond of the boys’ mischievous personalities 
She told them that she would like to start a project on a magical device that could show the location of everyone in Beauxbatons during the Christmas holidays when all four of the boys stayed on the school campus
Remus immediately came up with the idea of a map, and offered to make the map to show the location of people in different magical schools
Sirius had never been prouder
Messrs Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, Prongs and Vulpis (A/N: Vulpis is fox in Latin), are proud to present to you, the Marauders Map
From then on, their DADA professor became more of their fellow adventurer than a teacher. And by March, they had discovered two secret passageways—one towards the highest tower in Beauxbatons, which had a very nice balcony for them to smoke and chill, the other was towards a little street that sold delicious food at the foot of the mountain. Messrs Vulpis seldomly hung out with them since she was still a professor no matter what, but they had great fun every time they did  
 It was during their fifth year, before the winter hols, after they lit the librarian’s chair on fire, when things started to get even more interesting
The school decided to open up to other wizarding schools by implanting a pen pal project
“YASSSSS THIS WORLD IS BEAUTIFUL!!!!” The boys literally threw a party when they learned that they were assigned with Hogwarts students so that they could catch up on everything that was now happening in their old school
And because of sheer, dumb luck, James was assigned to none other than Lily bloody Evans
Prongs was basically sweating all over when he received the news, afraid that things had changed between them because he had tried contacting her tons of times and she hadn’t responded at all
She claimed that she was busy with schoolwork while Peter bluntly informed it was probably because she was upset with Prongs leaving school or finding another guy to pay attention to
When James arrived back at school from the hols, he received Lily’s reply and was fuming more than ever when he saw that most of the content was about Severus Snape
Turns out Peter got it right
Prongs spent a whole day ranting on and on about how slimy Snivellus Snape was to touch his precious little redhead when he was 
The letter he sent afterwards was too aggressive and it made matters worse 
He didn’t talk to the Marauders for a whole day after he received Lily’s rant about how he would never be better than Severus Snape
His friends understood him more than anyone else, and knew that he wouldn’t shut them out no matter what, so when James returned from the Black Lake that night with bloodshot eyes, he found his fellow Marauders sitting there waiting
His tears soaked Peter’s jacket as he sobbed and sobbed and sobbed that night
Moony, Wormtail and Padfoot had never seen their friend so vulnerable 
The following Sunday, Sirius and Remus spent their whole day in the common room thinking up plans for their friend and the boy in question didn’t show it, but he couldn’t be more grateful
The loudest high-five in history was created by Moony and Padfoot when James received a reply the next week, the Marauders could basically see Lily smile when they read the letter replying to James’ overly-enthusiastic description of Quidditch matches, Professor Bellerose and the Marauders Map
Sirius and Remus’ plans got better and better in every letter
They witnessed their friend falling hard and fast over again, unaware that they were also falling deep deep deep when they plotted and planned
Peter was having the time of his life watching James using every trick in the book to woo Lily Evans and hearing Moony and Padfoot ramble on and on about each other whenever the other wasn’t there
Everything was going along the flow. Apart from having a professor just as mischievous as them, it was just like old times, only better
Things, unfortunately, went downhill when the calendars flipped to the month of April
Girls had actually started fawning over Sirius, some flirted and some went as far as stalking or throwing themselves at him
It was no surprise, the disowned Black had naturally gorgeous looks
But that didn’t stop anger and jealousy bubbling inside Remus’ chest whenever he saw anyone, let alone a girl (well, aside from James and Peter) touch his darling Sirius Black, although he was in denial of such emotions
The change in their relationship was abrupt and obvious
They still huddled together to plan, for the sake of Prongs, but Remus always disagreed with Sirius on purpose, even if the idea was wonderful
Padfoot himself didn’t know what went wrong with the boy he loved so much, (but he didn’t know it at the time, did he?) and was actually hurt every time Remus started a war with him and never stayed to cuddle with him in the common room anymore
Remus could only stare when Marsha Earl, the most eager of Sirius’ “admirers”, asked Padfoot out openly in the dining hall, both blushing furiously
He lost his appetite immediately when he felt like he was being stabbed in the heart
He left the hall abruptly, terrified that Sirius had such an effect on him, too caught up in his emotions to notice his friends staring after him, with Sirius boring the deepest holes into his back
He didn’t care when he learned that Sirius didn’t agree to the French beauty’s invitation the next day. He stayed as far away from Padfoot as possible, not wanting to get hurt again.
James and Peter both felt really bad whenever Remus joked playfully around them but stayed completely silent around Sirius
James secretly told Lily about the situation in his letters to her, and she replied that she would bet anything that they were in love
He called her bollocks, but Lily’s little challenge was far from the most of his worries
Peter reported quietly to Prongs one day that the girl population were trying harder than ever to get Sirius to like them, and the poor black-haired boy was now having to deal with their constant fawning 24/7
Remus’ behaviour towards Sirius had escalated from ignorance to yelling at each other, calling each other names and sometimes even fighting like they were born enemies
Padfoot had erupted in Potions class once about how pathetic Remus was when he started an argument with Sirius over some stupid herbs that lasted 15 minutes
Peter swore he could hear Remus sniffling in his sleep that night
“Hey Moony, you ok?” “Y…yes, I’m totally fine” “I don’t think so mate, wanna talk about it?” No response
At the end of the month, Remus, panicking as he did every time he was soon to reach the full moon, trembled even more as he approached James and Peter and told them not to tag Sirius along when he transformed this time
The two were shocked as hell, and yelled at him to spill what in the name of Merlin was going on between Sirius and him, a question they had been dying to ask for months
Remus merely shook his head and looked at them with sorrowful and pleading eyes, begging them to listen to him in his own ways
James would have jumped back hollering and rushing towards Sirius if it weren’t for his self-control—he had never seen Remus so broken 
Prongs and Wormtail couldn’t bear the thought of their best friend undergoing his transformation alone, so they gave in and everything went according to Remus’ plans
Only it didn’t, the pain the werewolf went through this time was doubled, dare I say, tripled without Sirius’ soothing wet nose of his Animagus form and forehead kisses after the tormenting morphing
Matters became worse when Remus learned that James had spilt the beans that he drugged Sirius that night so he could stay in his dormitory and not follow them to the Whomping Willow 
The pain on the werewolf’s body grew more painful when he saw Marsha Earl skipping joyfully into the hospital wing to visit her friend and squealed that Sirius had finally agreed on going out with her the day after
“Sirius!” “Yes, Peter?” “You sure you wanna go out with that Earl girl?” “Of course, she’s gorgeous enough!” “You’re gonna ignore the fact that Remus’ hospital stay had lengthened into 2 weeks after your date today blurted the new out in the hospital wing?”
Padfoot ignored Wormtail and sauntered out the Bellefeuille common room with Marsha, though his heart was aching all over when his friend told him the truth that he had been avoiding with all his might
Marsha was extremely sweet and they could’ve great fun in the Three Broomsticks if Peter words weren’t ringing in Sirius’ head the whole time
So while Marsha was busy partying at said bar, Sirius slipped away at 5 pm, desperate to visit his old best friend
Moony was asleep in the hospital wing when he visited
But he was definitely not sound asleep since he was trembling madly
At the sight before him, Sirius shakenly walked towards the bed and got down on one knee
“Remus, Remus, Moons…please don’t shut me out again…” the voice that came out was hoarse
Remus’ eyes flew open, for he could recognize Sirius’ voice anywhere
“So,” The werewolf’s mouth pulled into a tight smile despite the pain his heart was going through, “enjoyed your date?”
“I mean, I just want you to be happy Pads, you don’t have to care for me, I love you, you know..” “Shut up.”
The two pairs of lips that have been aching to connect crashed together, stronger than a hurricane and firmer than an earthquake shaking the Earth
“He loves me…” was all that was on Sirius’ mind when he pulled at Remus’ bottom lip, coaxing a groan out of both of them
The kiss was an energy-drainer, and the two had no choice but to pull away to gasp for air
“I’m,” kiss “so,” kiss “so sorry Sirius,” long kiss “me too Moony,” they dived back into their own sea
“Can anyone, anyone at all, PLEASE explain to me what the fuckity fuck is happening!?” James bellowed loud enough for the whole dining hall to hear after Remus somehow miraculously healed all at once yesterday, earning himself lots of shushing from the forever graceful girls and professors. (except for Bellerose, of course)
However, the boys were staring at the pair that had just entered the hall, too alarmed to curse
In walked Remus and Sirius, in all their glory, whispering into each other’s ears like they had made up and went a level higher than best friends over a sodding day, which both James and Peter were sure they didn’t meet, like they haven’t for two weeks
The girls, noticing the expressions of the boys, turned towards the couple. Some of Sirius admirers, especially Marsha, went beet red
“Too bad for you mate,” Sirius smirked as he plopped down next to James, pulling Remus down with him, “Evans’ too smart for your own good, she won her little bet fair and square.”
One kiss to the werewolf’s forehead was all it took to confirm the black-haired boy’s statement, and all the boys who had, like Lily, betted with their friends that the pair was bound to get together soon, erupted into cheers 
The two Bellefeuilles in question merely tolled their eyes and shook their heads
The school soon accepted the gay couple like any other couple, Professor Bellerose being the largest supporter of them all
During the hols, James sneaked Lily into the Beauxbatons school grounds, chilling on the balcony that the boys loved so much, their long-distance relationship firmer than ever
Messrs Vulpis tagged along once, and she and Lily immediately became the best of friends 
Peter blushed as red as a tomato when Lily, ever the accurate match-maker whispered to all the Marauders in the dining hall during the Christmas hols that Peter had a crush on the pretty Marsha Earl, which was quite ironic since he always taunted her for getting in the way of Sirius and Remus’ relationship
The Marauders all persuaded him to ask her out, and he made the excuse of not knowing how to kiss
The consequences after such a statement was disastrous—Moony and Padfoot snogged in both public and private more than ever, saying that they were teaching their ol’ pal Peter how to display affection
In the end, Peter’s single status was also thrown out of the window, and Marsha, now officially Peter’s girlfriend, joined their little balcony gang
And because of the blonde, Wormtail didn’t turn to the Dark Arts, remaining a loyal friend after graduation
Padfoot practically squealing like a baby was an understatement, he was clinging on his husband and sobbing joyful tears when Harry James Potter was born to this world
When Harry turned 11 and it was time to choose which school he should go to, Mr and Mrs Pettigrew merely smiled at each other while Marsha bounced their baby daughter Aquila on her lap, smiles which spoke volumes
Sirius and Remus started arguing, an alarming contrast to the Pettigrew family. Padfoot kept hollering that Harry should go to Hogwarts and Remus trying to glare daggers at his husband (but to no avail) and repeating his statement that Beauxbatons was the best choice
The rest of the people in the room, including Harry and a 2-year-old Aquila, could only watch the two quarrel like 5-year-olds
Harry found himself on the platform 9 ¾ though, despite his Uncle Moony, Uncle Wormtail and Aunt Marsha’s protests
“Of course I’d like to study in the place where Uncle Moony and Padfoot fell in love,” he had said, grinning mischievously, “but Hogwarts is the place it all started, ain’t it?”
ϟ as usual, pls pls pls DO NOT REPOST, I spent three weeks or four writing this so plzz don’t break my heart. Thank you so much to those who’ve read this k baii ϟ
73 notes · View notes
switchcheek14-blog · 5 years
Text
Could Philly ever be a game development hub? Nathan Solomon says no
Editor’s note: (5/24/19, 9:37 p.m.) Wow, a lot of you really hated this story! In all seriousness, I realize now that we — I — missed adding a lot of context here. Technical.ly has been covering Philly’s video game community for years, including most recently things like the Phillytron arcade, companies’ crowdfunding raises and when Philly Dev Night became Philly Game Mechanics. We’ve also brought a whole bunch of local game makers to our own events over the years.
So, yeah, there’s a lot more that could have been said here that wasn’t. This story came about because the author wondered what happened to Philadelphia Game Lab, specifically; it doesn’t look like we covered its 2016 shutdown when it happened. The headline and the interviewee’s responses are meant to represent one (challenging) perspective. Still, the result didn’t do enough to also acknowledge the history and current activity of indie game development in Philly.
I’d love to publish a response guest post or roundup of responses to this story, so if you have strong feelings, please do email me — [email protected]. As always, thank you for the feedback. Seriously. -jz
For a few years before it shut down in 2016, the Philadelphia Game Lab (PGL) was a hub for those interested in building video games locally.
Originally, the nonprofit — not to be confused with the Philly Game Forge — was meant to be a kind of branch of another organization, the Grassroots Game Conference, before PGL founder Nathan Solomon concentrated on working with university students in game technology and development, which would eventually led to the founding of PGL. It shut down largely due to difficulties with its funding model and university partnerships.
There are a number of indie game development studios operating in Philadelphia right now, including PHL Collective, Cipher Prime, Gossamer Games and JumpButton Studio. But could the city still have aspirations for being a hub for the video game industry? Solomon says no.
Since Solomon’s departure from the game lab, he has become the director of Blackstone LaunchPad at Thomas Jefferson University. While he has not completely detached himself from the gaming community, he’s not a convener of it anymore.
I reached out to ask Solomon about the end of PGL, why the industry isn’t stronger in Philly, and whether indie developers have a chance to grow here. His responses have been edited for length and clarity.
###
We shut down in 2016. At that point we had held the Grassroots Game Conference for two years (2012 to 2013), then operated with focus on working with university students in immersive experience and game technology development as the Philadelphia Game Lab for two years (2014 to 2016). I actually started out with the idea that PGL would be a different sort of entity, and organically transitioned to the final model of working primarily with teams of university students and recent grads (about 120 individuals in total), in development of technology, in late 2013.
I can probably best organize the reasons for ending the project into two categories:
[First,] creative technology talent in Philadelphia lies overwhelmingly in universities. We had great relationships with professors and students at a range of universities, including Penn, CMU, Temple and Drexel. Students with whom we worked, especially at Penn and CMU, all loved this city but generally moved on high prestige tech companies on the west coast or elsewhere (unless they stayed here to work at Comcast). We were a step on that path, between university and prestige positions.
The bookend problem to that proposition, which eventually became clear, was that universities have a strong tendency to want to be in the position/role we were taking. We were squeezed between the universities wanting to develop IP/entrepreneurship and the tech companies to which our developers were inevitably bound. This made it hard to see how we could flourish in the long term.
[Second,] I founded PGL as a 501c3 in the belief that that structure would both facilitate university relationships, and be helpful in finding additional funding toward our mission. The problems we ran into with this approach were around the reality that our best and most promising funding sources ended up being in commissioned technology development.
We grew from $7,000 in revenue in 2013 to ~$700,000 in revenue in 2014, that went entirely toward paying students and recent graduates in this region — which created a problem unique to nonprofit structure, in that we could take no investment to continue that growth, and that a nonprofit cannot take on a credit line until it has three years of audited financials. The latter meant that every month or so, I had to approach a board member for bridging funds to carry us until we receive payment from a client for the work we were currently doing.
The institutional funding that we’d hoped would be aided by 501c3 status never materialized, for a couple of reasons. The first is that funding for economic development and regional job creation is (quite reasonably) much more focused on the unemployed and unskilled, rather than the highly skilled students with whom we worked — a majority of which were grad students. The second is that much grant funding is also dependent upon a longer history of audited financials.
Historically, video games tend to require a set of skills that have not aligned well with those of endemic Philadelphia businesses. Where else are 3D modeling, creative C++ programming and game design needed here? All of those things align well with motion picture/animation, theatrical embedded systems/theme parks, and other areas of expertise that are big in Los Angeles, Central Florida, NYC, etc. In addition to that path, there are locations like Austin and Maryland that have organically grown specifically as a result of game developers who started businesses there during periods of the industry’s greatest expansion.
In a place like Austin, there are a lot of developers, working for a number of game development entities. When one business goes under, a developer can move to another. That’s a much more appealing situation into which to be hired than going to a city where there’s only one game company, so it’s really a big deal to decide to become that sole game company in a city.
The only way something really major in games could come to Philadelphia would be if they parachuted in a fully formed, fully backed team of experts. There’s one example I know of that happening anywhere in the past, 38 Studios, and that did not work out well.
I previously worked with the folks in New Orleans who got a Louisiana tax break passed for game development, and that had negligible impact for them. [Editor’s note: Solomon also didn’t think tax credits would work here in Philly when they were proposed back in 2014.]
Canada does a better job with creating centers of opportunity in game development, largely because of the high quality and low cost of appropriate university training, and also because instead of tax breaks it directly subsidizes industry employees’ salaries. That said, its centers (Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal) also have some of the same endemic industries requiring skills with high applicability to game development that I mentioned previously.
I believe that the best opportunities for something like game development being truly significant in this region are in development of immersive experience. The biggest centers for this in North America are Los Angeles and Montreal. Montreal because it has a nexus of technical and creative talent, not unlike what is beginning to form in Philadelphia. Data shows that one of the best business categories here is live entertainment, so that immersive entertainment is strategically aligned with local opportunity in a way that games never were.
Absolutely, it’s a great place to live and to exploit one’s own skills and talents. The barriers would lie primarily in the fact that they are highly unlikely to find creative day jobs in the industry here and they are even less likely to find others with depth of experience and skills here.
I should also mention a minor factor that impacted PGL and would likely affect most indie developers starting up: Because there isn’t a base of experienced game industry people here, when you have a game business in Philadelphia that runs into barriers, and go to ask local people for help and resources, they’re unlikely to be able to dive in and be really useful in helping you to next steps. There’s a strong likelihood that you’ll get the response “you’re the visionary; just make this work like you always do!” I got to a point where I didn’t have answers for what we should do next here, and neither did anyone else.
I’m director of the Blackstone LaunchPad for entrepreneurship at Jefferson University and I also spend a fair amount of time developing immersive works and technology in collaboration with creative engineers and other folks. We just patented a new method for large-scale deforming of physical spaces for responsive experiences, and are working on a few other projects.
I’m also trying to get good enough at Fusion360 to better develop additive and subtractive-manufactured components for installations. I come from cinematography, so my practical skills are largely in optics, light and physical rigging.
-30-
Tumblr media
Source: https://technical.ly/philly/2019/05/24/could-philly-ever-be-a-game-development-hub-nathan-solomon-says-no/
0 notes
douchebagbrainwaves · 4 years
Text
HOW YOU BUY A STARTUP HUBS WORK
One of the things I had to do the other. The fact that the best sources of ideas are not million dollar ideas, and you have a statically-typed language without lexical closures or macros.1 As a practical matter, I think, is to divide projects into sharply defined modules, each with a definite owner, and with interfaces between them that are as carefully designed and, if possible, as articulated as programming languages. In a field like physics this probably doesn't do much harm, but the Web makes it possible to track them at work. Samuel Johnson said it took a hundred years for a writer's reputation to converge. Genes count for little by comparison: being a genetic Leonardo was not enough to compensate for having been born near Milan instead of Florence. If you draw a tree and you change the angle of someone's eye five degrees, people notice. With trend stories, PR firms usually line up one or more experts to talk about the normal operating range of a piece of code is being hacked by three or four different people, no one of whom really owns it, it will be a minority squared.2 They have millions of users, so they must be promising something people want is to look at a group we're interviewing through Demo Day investors' eyes. What you want to learn how to operate hers. In a remarkable coincidence, Ms. Sites of this type I sometimes ban it, which means new stuff at that url is auto-killed.3
But everyone knows this is a special case: you can't defeat a monopoly by a frontal attack. Simplicity takes effort—genius, even. Scientists start out doing work that's perfect, in the sense that hackers and painters are trying to write interesting software, and then for all their followers to die. In most fields the appearance of ease seems to come over people when they try to do it your way and he likes to do things their own way, he is unlikely to head straight for the conclusion that a great artist is something that's good for you, like broccoli, because someone said so in a book. Genetic algorithms may let us create things too complex to design in the ordinary sense. They were atoms of drawing, but arranged randomly. Saying that taste is subjective.
Don't worry about us. This was perfectly true. It should be a pencil, not a piece of machinery: what works best.4 For example, the Reuters article that got picked up by USA Today in September 2004. That keeps editors honest, and just as importantly, makes users confident they'd know if the editors stopped being honest. Almost everyone hates their dissertation by the time you face the horror of writing a dissertation. Good design is often daring. When people first start drawing, for example, you can use them as communication devices. As hackers, one of you has an idea in the shower about how to solve it.
User behavior turns out to be mistaken. It's not so much that resembling nature is intrinsically good as that nature has had a long time I felt bad about this, just as there are in the real world. When someone's working on a problem that seems too big, I always ask: is there some way to bite off some subset of the problem, then let your mind wander just far enough for new ideas to form. If I spent half the day loitering on University Ave, I'd notice. Developers have used the accelerometer in ways Apple could never have imagined. A site for college students to waste time? Many painters might have thought, this is just something to put in the background to frame her head. Hacking and painting have a lot in common. I have a benchmark for this, because this is one of the reasons, though they may not consciously realize it, that readers trust bloggers more than Business Week. What you want to do better.
It's not cheating to copy. A worse danger is that you don't see the scary part upfront. That's how it happens in books and movies, because that's the colorful way to do that is to implement it. Ideally you want to buy us? For example, when Leonardo painted the portrait of Ginevra de Benci, their attention is often immediately arrested by it, just as it's hard to imagine anything more fun to work on now. The empirical answer is: no. Really they ought to be writing research papers.5 I asked myself what I got done that day, the answer would have been there without PR firms, but briefly and skeptically. You hear this from math to painting.
An amusing cartoon takes less. It just worked. Because hackers are makers rather than scientists, the right half was a ziggurat; he inverted it to get the present shape.6 Measuring what hackers are actually trying to do is solve it. Sorry about that. Everyone would agree that YC had jumped the shark. TV all day—days at the end of the spectrum are crack and meth.
Apparently only recommendations really matter at the best schools.7 My own feeling is that object-oriented program, it can be used as a substitute for thought. It was common for the master to paint the principal figures and for assistants to paint the others and the background. Even these buildings only tended to be asymmetric about major axes, though; there were hundreds of minor symmetries. At the time, no one will work on a harder problem unless it is proportionately or at least log n more rewarding.8 The example of painting can teach us not only how to manage our own work, that bothered the Pre-Raphaelites.9 But Durer's engravings and Saarinen's womb chair and the Pantheon and the original Porsche 911 all seem to have done it by fixing something that they thought ugly. That usage has become increasingly common during my lifetime. A lot of my friends are CS professors now, so I have the inside story about admissions. Deals fall through. Don't fix Windows, because the longer I spend on the trail, the longer I spend on the trail, the longer I have to think without interruption.
Notes
A small, fast browser that you wouldn't mind missing, initially, were ways to get as deeply into subjects as I know randomly generated DNA would not be formally definable, but no doubt often are, and tax rates has a spam probabilty of. Managers are presumably wondering, how much effort on sales.
They're common to all cultures with long traditions of living in cities. The number of big companies funded 3/4 of their initial attitude. Analects VII: 1 It's hard to measure how dependent you've become on distractions, try this experiment is that your peers are chosen for you, it would certainly be less than a nerdy founder trying to deliver these sentences as if you'd invested at a discount to whatever the valuation of an outcast, just as if you'd invested at a large chunk of stock. I'm skeptical whether economic inequality, and they would probably be worth doing, because when people tell you that if colleges want to turn into other forms of inequality, and when given the freedom to they derive the same time.
Someone proofreading a manuscript could probably write a subroutine to do sales yourself initially.
A more accurate predictor of high quality. Finally she said Ah!
The wave of the current edition, which can happen in any case, is a dotted line on a road there are no startups to die from running Kazaa helped ensure the success of Skype. Interestingly, the rest of the things Julian gave us. You can safely write off all the best approach is to use those solutions.
And when a startup we had to find users to switch to a degree in design is any good at sniffing out any red flags about the right question, which is all about hitting outliers, are not in 1950 something one could do as a rule of thumb, the growth is genuine.
Instead of bubbling up from the 1940s or 50s instead of hiring them. And startups that get funded this way probably should. But if idea clashes became common enough, maybe the corp dev is to let yourself feel it mid-game. More precisely, this seems an odd idea.
7x a year, but which didn't taste very good. Whereas the value of their initial attitude. I'm not saying we should make a conscious effort to make you register to get into grad school in the 70s, moving to Monaco would give us.
To be safe either a don't use code written while you were able to invest at a large organization that often creates a rationalization for doing so. During the Internet was as late as Newton's time it takes to get the money they're paid isn't a picture of anything. That way most reach the stage where they're sufficiently convincing well before Demo Day. I've said into something that conforms with their companies till about a startup.
0 notes
personalsecondblog · 6 years
Text
10.5.18 End of week 6 finally!
It’s midnight. Officially the end of week 6.
I could’ve wrote this earlier, but I hooped first and went shopping before that.
I thought I had a DB due today, but I found out and , before I left my school, that there wasn’t a DB assigned this week. I’m so used to having one each week that I was working on autopilot and immediately jumped in to researching for that assignment right after my stats class. I had fun doing it unlike previous times. This was because I went straight in to my textbook because I already read the Powerpoint. and familiarized myself with the DB question over the weekend. That part was harrowing because I did not understand the question and he article we had to read until I read the textbook.
I hate reading the slides, but I’m glad I got it over with because I was familiar with some of the terms and concepts already. I was frustrated with the question because I only read chapter 6, but after reading chapter 7, the question made sense. It was just like Into to Supply Chain class. The DB question does not make any sense unless you read the material. After that, i had an idea of what i was going to write, but I could only write something that wasn’t very deep. With the time I had, i could only write something that was general and without an outside source. Ultimately, I was planning to submit something that was not my best work, but enough to earn me full credit. I always wanted to finish up the DB so I could leave school without a worry. But when I saw that nobody else did the  DB, i realized it wasn’t assigned this week. I was ahead of schedule, just like I wanted, but I didn’t know it at the time.
i thought the professor was going to cram tow chapters in one week like she did last time, but she was nice and didn’t. Oh welll, at least know what to expect. I want to work on the DB right now, but unfortunately, I have a long list of other things to do like
Meet up with stats group partner tomorrow.
Review the textbook to create a new rough draft and explain it to said partner.
Edit ethics group paper outline
Edit ethics Powerpoint
Practice presenting ethics outline
Text ethics group about what to do
Assist with making backup outline
Study for stats exam
Review for other stats class on linear programming
Do Int. Business DB and take notes on chapters 6 and 7.
Do DB for next next week.
I want to go to sleep,t but I have more things to add on here like an update with my Business class.  We had our first exam and that’s where i noticed a shift in my professor’s mood. She’s usually cheerful, but on exam day, she was irritable. I think she made the exam open book just that day and I remember her saying to a student, ‘it doesn’t matter when I give the exam, it doesn’t matter’. I guess she says that ,because no matter if the exam is open book, the grades won’t matter because the lowest passing grade is a D which is probably what she’s expecting. From observation of my group and the class DBs, I can see where she’s getting the forecast. As I stated before, my group pretends that they know the material, but I know for a fact that not all of them do. So, when our exams were passed back, I would say their attitude changed. I got an A. I only missed one question which I could’ve got right if I studied more. I don’t know their exact grades, but judging by their behavior, I can say it wasn’t good. I know Goro didn’t do well on the exam because he missed most of the DBs and when he did them, he didn’t know what he was talking about. And his quiz scores were pretty low, i’m sure. Same for Baraka. For one of the DBs, his response to mine was basically plagiarism of my post. He had zero original thought.
When I met up with my group in class (for the first time in three weeks), it was interesting. A lot of things changed. For one, I was expecting the exam to show these people what they really knew and as a result, it kinda did. Goro’s attitude changed significantly. Instead of being that arrogant ass like last time, he acted kind of desperate, as in, “I did horribly on the exam; tell me what to do for this group project so it can pull up my grade; I really need this boost”. Last time, he and Sheeva were trying to be the leaders, but now, Goro seems to be bowing down to Sheeva. Sheeva seems to be the project manager now. Skarlet is the only one who seems like she’s taking the material seriously. Our professor made us work on a part of the project in class so we had to get in to groups. So far, they sound like they know what they’re doing, but this is the easy part of the essay so they shouldn’t mess this up. Sheeva sounds like she’s been studying, but its still sounds superficial. We’ll see at the end.
I am letting them reap what they sow. They still ignored me at this meeting. They can all go off themselves.
BTW, I ate bad again. I ate alot during the day and ate candy at 8pm. Then, i bought food from Ralph which wasn’t healthy. i haven’t eaten it yet, but I’m scared to find out if I gain weight from this.
I also feel like my jeans got looser. Finally my body is changing.
0 notes
mimikoflamemaker · 7 years
Text
Well, looks like this is that time again... I never considered myself as “soft” quite the contrary in fact, but the living in a constant state when half of my brain screams “Do NOT want” and the other is like “Oh, but you must” is really grating on my nerves... The  rest of my venting below the cut to spare your eyes.
At this point I’m not sure if I’ll be able to crawl out from the current slump. I had a few of them since starting the PhD, but they usually ended up on having doubts I was able to somehow talk myself out of. At the same time the last ‘surge of doubt’ I had was pretty bad and this one is likely the same if not worse.
My research is going like  shit. I’m thinking the process over and over again, wondering what might be the reason, but the only thing I’m coming up with is me being shit at chemistry - which was never a problem in the lab before - or maybe me being shit in general. When I finally, FINALLY, thought that I got it, the last part of the chain reaction went haywire. I don’t have the mental capacity to start this all over for the third time I’m afraid....To the point that I just decided to skip going to the lab on Friday and stayed home. And getting up today wouldn’t probably happen if it wasn’t for my parents.
And I’m just sitting here wondering about what’s the point of it all anyway? Except for feeding my frustration and pushing stress levels through the roof I don’t see any. Better work perspective? Nope - even if I do become an academic teacher (which is unlikely considering that I straight out refused to quit my job and commit fully to studies, because hello, I cannot afford that) I will probably be getting paid less than my current job is paying me. And the so called industry that could hire me are mostly food-factories (you need to be real lucky to land a job somewhere else  or know a lot of ‘right’ people)  - been there done that, thank you very much. Unless I will absolutely have to, I’m not going to set my foot within the premises of such facility ever again.
Prestige? I’m pretty sure you can’t eat that.  Besides if I have to pay for that “prestige” by being nothing but the footrest to my older colleagues and professors than I think I’ll pass. I’ve already been “inside” for long enough to see how it’s going. Me, a PhD students, works aside from my own research on a parts of my tutor project which in turn was dumped on her by the chief of the whole Institute. Guess who is getting the most money out of the project we prepare or the most recognition for the publication we wrote. The answer is, obviously, not me. And I do not take well  to being used like that.
There is also something as simple as ‘self-satisfaction’, but it’s getting more and more difficult to push through on the sheer power of “I’ll make them all see how smart I really am!” That’s works in anime not in real-life. I’m underslept, constantly tired and I’m pretty sure that part of whatever mistakes I’m making comes from the fact that I cannot focus well enough to see them before they happen. And at this point the perspective of 8hrs of undisturbed sleep is winning against whatever resolve I might have possessed.
I just feel that if I won’t step away for a while to think it over and hopefully find some real reason to push on, then even if I passed the first year of those studies I might not be able to continue.
That would be the part of my brain screeching “Do Not Want, just leave me be’, but there is also the other one.
First of all I’m not a quitter - once I start something, I eventually bring this to an end - even if it’s involve a lot of cursing and screaming on my part. Not many people know that I was very close to quitting my studies when I was in the 2nd year. But I got introduced to microbiology, found a passion and managed to get that MSc. Too bad that my current research has nothing to do with that or at least not at this point.
And apparently, despite me stubbornly saying this is not the case, I’m scared of the judgement of others.
My father recently told me, while he was dropping me off at uni, that “If I don’t see any other reason to continue, I might as well do it for him’ Sure thanks dad, that’s just the kind of support I needed. My mom is a bit better at that as she’s saying things like “treat it as an intellectual exercise, because it’s something you need.’ Now I may not be striving to be a people-pleaser in general, but it looks like I will turn into a puppy when the people whose opinion I value are concerned. Then I’m more like “I’ll do anything even if I hate it, just say you love me.”  Also one of my friends already dropped out of her PhD course when she was halfway through and I had the audacity to call her out on this. So now I’m afraid that she will gloat that I failed to and consequently the rest of the, will make fun of me. There is also my tutor whom I genuinely like and who had been super helpful to me despite the fact that she is probably slowly losing her patience too. I know I’m losing mine.
I’m just so tired of everything right now, I no longer see any sense in what I’m doing to myself. What’s worse I’m not seeing any sense in where my life is going to - I don’t have a goal aside from this stupid PhD I’m utterly fed up with, no perspective of starting family anytime soon (because I cannot pretend I’m someone else and men tend to stay clear away from women like me. Also I suck at social interaction in general). I’m just sort of drifting, without having any idea of where I’m going to.
I just want to stop being so damn tired. And I want to see some sense in what I’m doing.
0 notes
porchenclose10019 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes
repwincoml4a0a5 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes
rtscrndr53704 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes
rtawngs20815 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes
grgedoors02142 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes
chpatdoorsl3z0a1 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes
stormdoors78476 · 7 years
Text
Republicans Are Killing This Regulation In Order To Save It
WASHINGTON ― Republicans have been shredding Obama-era regulations with a special congressional power that not only kills a regulation but also is supposed to stop a federal agency from ever reissuing similar rules.
When it comes to mandatory drug testing for unemployed people, however, Republicans actually want the U.S. Labor Department to reissue a rule that Congress and President Donald Trump killed last month. It remains unclear what will happen with the policy, but the episode has already demonstrated that even if Congress kills a regulation, there’s no guarantee it will stay dead.
Federal agencies issue regulations to carry out laws Congress has passed. In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which essentially provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down regulations an outgoing president issues before leaving office.
In the 1990s, Congress gave itself a special power when it passed the Congressional Review Act, which provides a shortcut for lawmakers to strike down recently issued regulations. The procedure is only effective when one party gains control of both Congress and the White House, since a sitting president of the opposite party could veto attacks on his regulations.
Trump has signed more than a dozen Congressional Review Act resolutions since taking office. One of them nullified a rule the Labor Department issued last year that allowed states to drug-test people applying for unemployment insurance ― but only for unemployed people seeking work in a narrow range of occupations with a public safety component, such as commercial drivers and police officers. (Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program that replaces a portion of a person’s wages if she is laid off through no fault of her own. Before the regulation, the federal government has never allowed states to add a drug test as a condition of eligibility.)
Republicans hated the rule the Obama Labor Department produced, because they wanted states to be able to drug-test unemployed workers in other occupations. Last month Congress approved and Trump signed a resolution throwing out the Obama rules.
Once the regulation had been struck down, some Republicans seemed to think states could go ahead with making unemployment claimants take the tests, which has been something of an obsession for Republicans since about 2010. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), for instance, said last month that “Mississippi should be free to pursue the drug testing reforms” the state had previously enacted. The state law had been on hold because the U.S. Labor Department hadn’t finalized its regulation until late last year.
Here’s the problem with Wicker’s view: The underlying statute that authorized the drug testing ― which Congress passed in 2012 and which is still on the books ― says states can only test unemployment claimants who are seeking work in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing “as determined under regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor.” Those regulations are gone now, and they’re not supposed to come back.
The text of the Congressional Review Act states that a rule Congress has disapproved “may not be reissued in substantially the same form” unless lawmakers pass a new law specifically telling the relevant agency to do so. Congress hasn’t passed a new drug testing law, but some top Republicans nevertheless expect the Trump Labor Department to reissue the regulation with a broader testing mandate.
“My understanding is that they will promulgate a new rule,” Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), sponsor of the drug testing resolution in the House, told The Huffington Post last month.
Another one heads to President Trump’s desk. This legislation allows states to have drug testing to receive federal unemployment benefits. http://pic.twitter.com/cFnvdeQqX1
— Paul Ryan (@SpeakerRyan) March 19, 2017
Spokespeople for the Labor Department declined to say what the agency would do, though its current director has said the department “looks forward to examining additional flexibilities for states relative to the drug testing of persons seeking unemployment benefits.” 
Mississippi, Wisconsin and Texas each created unemployment drug testing programs that are pending while the federal regulation is sorted out. A spokesperson for Texas Workforce Commission, which handles unemployment insurance in the state, told The Huffington Post on Tuesday that the agency hasn’t received any guidance from the federal government but is waiting for the Labor Department to issue a new regulation.
Rena Steinzor, a University of Maryland law professor and co-founder of the Center for Progressive Reform, said a new regulation that is “substantially the same” as the old one would be vulnerable to a lawsuit.  
“I don’t know why they were all in a fluster about this rule, but assuming there’s minor tweaking and they put it out again, somebody would have to dislike it and bring it to court,” Steinzor said.
Steinzor said she believed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has shied away from issuing regulations to protect poultry workers from injuries in large part because Congress struck down an ergonomics regulation in 2001. Before Trump took office, the ergonomics rule was the only one that had been successfully targeted under the CRA.  
Since the Congressional Review Act has been so rarely used, experts disagree on what could happen if an agency tried to replace a rule that had been nullified. Curtis Copeland, a former expert on rules with the Congressional Research Service, said it’s unlikely a lawsuit could succeed.
“Someone could try and take the agency to court, saying that the new rule is ‘substantially the same’ and therefore should not have been issued without subsequent congressional authorization,” Copeland said in an email. But he pointed out that a section of the Congressional Review Act actually exempts actions taken under the law from judicial review.
“And given this language, the courts have been generally unwilling to hear CRA-related cases, saying ‘Congress has said we have no role here,’” he said.
If courts don’t want to overturn agency actions related to the Congressional Review Act, that leaves Congress as the arbiter of what counts as “substantially the same” under the law. So if the current Congress wants an agency to redo a nullified regulation and the executive branch is happy to do so, there’s nobody else who could stop it from happening.
Some Republicans have reportedly toyed with the idea that the Trump administration could introduce liberal regulations just so the Republican Congress could permanently nullify them with the Congressional Review Act, thereby hamstringing any future Democratic presidents. The episode with the drug testing rule shows, however, that it’s mostly up to Congress whether an agency’s rules are kosher. That means the portion of Obama’s regulatory legacy that Trump has supposedly killed with the Congressional Review Act could be resurrected.  
“The ‘substantially similar’ requirement of the CRA is essentially self-policed by Congress,” said Philip Wallach, a senior fellow with the Brookings Institution.
“It’s not even that clear to me that Congress has really thought through all these rules and said to themselves, ‘Oh it’s really important that we never get another rule like this,’” Wallach said, adding that he thinks Republicans’ main motivation may have been simply to rebuke Obama.
As for lawsuits, potential plaintiffs won’t necessarily need help from an arcane parliamentary law if they didn’t like a state’s unemployment drug testing scheme. George Wentworth, senior counsel for the National Employment Law Project, a worker advocacy group, pointed out that states have been stung by lawsuits over drug testing for other types of public benefits. Courts recognize that a drug test counts as a “search” by the government, and it’s up to states to make sure their programs don’t run afoul of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches.  
“A state that drug-tests individuals just because they are applying for unemployment benefits has got a constitutional problem,” Wentworth said.
-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
from DIYS http://ift.tt/2pAHsLM
0 notes