[YouWhy]

Is the question at hand about balancing local building authorization with the government's intent to encourage a specific kind of national infrastructure businesses?

This seems to be supported by this quote:

> Putting arbitrary deadlines on state, local, and Tribal governments to start and finish complicated permit reviews...

I'm not an American but I am alarmed at the recent tendency for bad-faith rule making. However - the above sounds in reasonably good faith - is that indeed the case or am I missing some angle?

[bix6]

Worth reading the letter from local govs as they lay out why this is such a complicated and slow problem: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/20251...

No big business in the US acts in good faith so the fact they are cheering this on tells me to be suspect. My read of this is they want to juice returns / timelines by avoiding bureaucracy and the city / local residents will deal with the inevitable mess.

[xemdetia]

From my perspective depending on where they want to develop it might be trivial to add something time consuming to a proposal such as eminent domain or easement reviews that will run out the shot clock and drown out reasonable questions by local governments. Local governance often is complicated by local (town), regional (county), and state level roles. Additionally depending on the area not all of these roles are even staffed by people working on it full-time.

[cyanydeez]

Laws on public nuisance sound in good faith, its more about whose in positions of enforcement.

GOP would call this the deep state. Regulators and judges have been targets of modern GOP fascism.