It’s Friday.
President Shitshow’s public schedule for…
Friday (08/29/2025):
On Thursday, President Material Boy signed an Executive Order; MAKING FEDERAL ARCHITECTURE BEAUTIFUL AGAIN…
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Purpose. The Founders, in line with great societies before them, attached great importance to Federal civic architecture. They wanted America’s public buildings to inspire the American people and encourage civic virtue. President George Washington and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson consciously modeled the most important buildings in Washington, D.C., on the classical architecture of ancient Athens and Rome. They sought to use classical architecture to visually connect our contemporary Republic with the antecedents of democracy in classical antiquity, reminding citizens not only of their rights but also their responsibilities in maintaining and perpetuating its institutions.
Washington and Jefferson personally oversaw the competitions to design the Capitol Building and the White House. Under the direction and following the vision of these two Founders, Pierre Charles L’Enfant designed the Nation’s capital as a classical city. For approximately a century and a half following America’s founding, America’s Federal architecture continued to be characterized by beautiful and beloved buildings of largely, though not exclusively, classical design. In the 1960s, the Federal Government largely replaced traditional designs for new construction with modernist and brutalist ones. The Federal architecture that ensued, overseen by the General Services Administration (GSA), was often unpopular with Americans. The new buildings ranged from the undistinguished to designs even GSA now admits many in the public found unappealing.
In 1994, GSA responded to this widespread criticism by establishing the Design Excellence Program. The GSA intended that program to “provide visual testimony to the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of the American Government.” Unfortunately, the program has not met this goal. Under the Design Excellence Program, GSA has often selected designs by prominent architects with little regard for local input or regional aesthetic preferences. The resulting Federal architecture sometimes impresses the architectural elite, but not the American people who the buildings are meant to serve. Many of these new Federal buildings are not even visibly identifiable as civic buildings.
It is time to update the policies guiding Federal architecture to address these problems and ensure that architects designing Federal buildings serve their clients, the American people.Sec. 2. Policy. (a) Applicable Federal public buildings should uplift and beautify public spaces, inspire the human spirit, ennoble the United States, and command respect from the general public. They should also be visually identifiable as civic buildings and, as appropriate, respect regional architectural heritage. Architecture — particularly traditional and classical architecture — that meets the criteria set forth in this subsection is the preferred architecture for applicable Federal public buildings. In the District of Columbia, classical architecture shall be the preferred and default architecture for Federal public buildings absent exceptional factors necessitating another kind of architecture.
(b) Where the architecture of applicable Federal public buildings diverges from the preferred architecture set forth in subsection (a) of this section, great care and consideration must be taken to choose a design that commands respect from the general public and clearly conveys to the general public the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of America’s system of self-government.
(c) When renovating, reducing, or expanding applicable Federal public buildings that do not meet the criteria set forth in subsection (a) of this section, the feasibility and potential expense of building redesign to meet those criteria should be examined. Where feasible and economical, such redesign should be given substantial consideration, especially with regard to the building’s exterior.
Sec. 3. Definitions. For the purposes of this order:
(a) “Applicable Federal public building” means:(i) all Federal courthouses and agency headquarters;
(ii) all Federal public buildings in the National Capital Region; and
(iii) all other Federal public buildings that cost or are expected to cost more than $50 million in 2025 dollars to design, build, and finish, but does not include infrastructure projects or land ports of entry.
(b) “Brutalist architecture” means the style of architecture that grew out of the early 20th-century modernist movement that is characterized by a massive and block-like appearance with a rigid geometric style and large-scale use of exposed poured concrete.
(c) “Classical architecture” means the architectural tradition derived from the forms, principles, and vocabulary of the architecture of Greek and Roman antiquity, and as later developed and expanded upon by such Renaissance architects as Alberti, Brunelleschi, Michelangelo, and Palladio; such Enlightenment masters as Robert Adam, John Soane, and Christopher Wren; such 19th-century architects as Benjamin Henry Latrobe, Robert Mills, and Thomas U. Walter; and such 20th-century practitioners as Julian Abele, Daniel Burnham, Rafael Carmoega, Charles F. McKim, John Russell Pope, Julia Morgan, and the firm of Delano and Aldrich. Classical architecture encompasses such styles as Neoclassical, Georgian, Federal, Greek Revival, Beaux-Arts, and Art Deco.
(d) “Deconstructivist architecture” means the style of architecture generally known as “deconstructivism” that emerged during the late 1980s and that features fragmentation, disorder, discontinuity, distortion, skewed geometry, and the appearance of instability.
(e) “General public” means members of the public who are not:
(i) artists, architects, engineers, art or architecture critics, instructors or professors of art or architecture, or members of the building industry; or
(ii) affiliated with any interest group, trade association, or any other organization, whose membership is financially affected by decisions involving the design, construction, or remodeling of public buildings.
(f) “Public building” has the meaning given that term in section 3301(a)(5) of title 40, United States Code.
(g) “Traditional architecture” includes classical architecture, as defined herein, and also includes the historic humanistic architecture such as Gothic, Romanesque, Second Empire, Pueblo Revival, Spanish Colonial, and other Mediterranean styles of architecture historically rooted in various regions of America.
(h) “2025 dollars” means dollars adjusted for inflation using the Bureau of Economic Analysis’s Gross Domestic Product price deflator and using 2025 as the base year.
Sec. 4. Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture. (a) Executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall to the extent practicable adhere to the following Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture:
(i) The policy shall be to provide requisite and adequate facilities in an architectural style and form that is distinguished and that will reflect the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of the American Government. Because of their proven ability to meet these requirements, classical and traditional architecture are preferred modes of architectural design. This preference does not exclude the possibility of alternative styles in appropriate circumstances. Major emphasis should be placed on the choice of designs that embody architectural excellence. Specific attention should be paid to the possibilities of incorporating into such designs qualities that reflect the regional architectural traditions of that part of the Nation in which buildings are located. Where appropriate, fine art should be incorporated in the designs, with emphasis on the work of living American artists. Designs shall adhere to sound construction practice and utilize materials, methods, and equipment of proven dependability. Buildings shall be economical to build, operate, and maintain, and should be accessible to the handicapped.
(ii) Design must flow from the needs of the Government and the aspirations and preferences of the American people to the architectural profession, and not vice versa. Competitions for the design of Federal buildings should be held where appropriate. The advice of distinguished architects practiced in classical or traditional architecture should, as a rule, be sought prior to the award of important design contracts.
(iii) The choice and development of the building site should be considered the first step of the design process. This choice should be made in cooperation with local agencies. Special attention should be paid to the general ensemble of streets and public places of which Federal buildings will form a part. Where possible, buildings should be located so as to permit a generous development of landscape.
Sec. 5. GSA Actions. (a) The Administrator of General Services (Administrator) shall adhere to the policies and principles set forth in sections 2 and 4 of this order, and shall expeditiously update GSA policies and procedures to incorporate such policies and principles and advance the purposes of this order.
(b) The Administrator shall:
(i) ensure that GSA architects whose duties include reviewing, assisting with, or approving the selection of architects or designs for applicable Federal public buildings have formal training in, or substantial and significant experience with, classical or traditional architecture;
(ii) create the position of senior advisor for architectural design, for an individual with specialized experience in classical architecture, to help develop GSA procedures, advise on architectural standards, and provide guidance during design evaluations or design juries;
(iii) where the design of an applicable Federal public building is selected pursuant to a design-build competition under section 3309 of title 41, United States Code, list experience with classical or traditional architecture as specialized experience and technical competence in the phase-one solicitation, and give substantive weight to these factors when evaluating which offerors will be advanced to phase two; and
(iv) consistent with sections 4302 and 4312 of title 5, United States Code, make advancing the purposes and implementing the policies of this order a critical performance element in the individual performance plans of the Chief Architect of GSA and appropriate subordinate employees in the GSA Public Buildings Service involved in selecting designs for applicable Federal public buildings
(c) Where GSA intends to select a building design pursuant to a design competition, the Administrator shall actively recruit architectural firms and, as applicable, designers with experience in classical and traditional architecture to enter such competition and shall, to the extent practicable, ensure that multiple designs in such modes are advanced to the final evaluation round.
(d) In the event the Administrator proposes to approve a design for a new applicable Federal public building that diverges from the preferred architecture set forth in subsection 2(a) of this order, including Brutalist or Deconstructivist architecture or any design derived from or related to these types of architecture, the Administrator shall notify the President through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy not less than 30 days before GSA could reject such design without incurring substantial expenditures. Such notification shall set forth the reasons the Administrator proposes to approve such design, including:
(i) a detailed explanation of why the Administrator believes selecting such design is justified, with particular focus on whether such design is as beautiful and reflective of the dignity, enterprise, vigor, and stability of the American system of self-government as alternative designs using preferred architecture;
(ii) the total expected cost of adopting the proposed design, including estimated maintenance and replacement costs throughout its expected lifecycle; and
(iii) a description of the designs using preferred architecture seriously considered for such project and the total expected cost of adopting such designs, including estimated maintenance and replacement costs throughout their expected lifecycles.
MAKING FEDERAL ARCHITECTURE BEAUTIFUL AGAIN. 08/29/2025.
I asked ChatGPT to summarize the above; it’s a test, I’ve never used it like that before.
EO: Making Federal Architecture Beautiful Again
Trump just revived his old “Make Buildings Pretty” order — mandating that federal buildings use classical or “traditional” styles (columns, domes, Greek cosplay, etc.) instead of anything modern. Brutalism and glass boxes? Out. Greco-Roman cosplay? In.
The kicker: if a design doesn’t fit his aesthetic, GSA has to send it to him for approval. Yes, he’s literally trying to be America’s building critic-in-chief.
Supporters call it “restoring beauty.” Critics call it creative censorship, ego-fueled cosplay, and a giant middle finger to modern architecture.
ChatGPT. 08/29/2025.
This is the summary it provided for estimated cost of this new EO…
TL;DR Snark Summary
- You’re shelling out billions for marble-laden federal opulence — think “Versailles with columns.”
- Some of this could be cheaper, but that won’t stop Trump from playing architect-in-chief.
- Modernists be warned: your contracts are being redirected to firms that specialize in white columns and civic fluff.
Starting today, thanks to an EO from President Intentionally Trying to Wreck the Economy for His Own Gain, even low-value packages shipped from abroad will get slapped with tariffs. A blanket tax on everything. Who could’ve seen this coming? Oh right — we did.
.@ChristineRomans has an example of how this is playing out in real life: a parent ordered a $150 Jersey from their kid’s favorite Italian soccer team. The UPS delivery person let them know it had a $175 tariff on it, due upon receipt, and said they could reject the package. https://t.co/ntVeOA8wDa
— Josh Dorner (@JoshDorner) August 29, 2025
CNBC News (08/29/2025):
The postal carrier or “qualified party” (e.g., USPS, Royal Mail, La Poste) that decides how duties are collected on packages moving through the postal stream must collect those duties from shippers or recipients and remit them to U.S. Customs.
The carriers have two methods to choose from — either a percentage of the country’s tariff rate (ad valorem) or a flat per-package fee, De Filippis explained. With the flat rate, there are three tiers: $80 if the IEEPA tariff rate — the trade duties put into effect by Trump using emergency economic powers — is under 16% (such as EU goods at 15%); $160 if it’s between 16% and 25% (such as Vietnam at 20%); and $200 if it’s above 25% (such as India at 50% or China at 30%). After a six-month transition period, the flat fee option goes away and all packages will be subject to the percentage tariff rate only.
According to Marianne Rowden, trade attorney and CEO of the E-Merchants Trade Council, which represents e-sellers and companies that support e-commerce, the total increase in cost to be paid by small and medium-sized businesses may reach over $71 billion, calculations that she said are based on an average value per package of $48 and data from the U.S Customs and Border Protection for fiscal year 2025.
The number of government postal offices shutting the door on shipments bound for the U.S. has grown to include Swiss Post, Japan Post and postal services in Australia, India, New Zealand, the U.K. and other parts of Europe that announced they are suspending shipments.
Deutsche Post and DHL Parcel Germany, both divisions of DHL, stopped U.S.-bound shipments on August 25.
“For shippers, this brings increased costs, complexity, and the need to adapt shipping setups to comply with new customs requirements. They may also face longer processing times and additional administrative steps when importing lower-value goods,” said Andrew Williams, CEO for DHL Express Americas, who told CNBC it will continue to process inbound shipments to the United States in accordance with the applicable customs rules and regulations. “Our main priority remains to protect our core service commitment to customers and to minimize any disruption that arises from changes in tariff and trade policy, while remaining compliant with applicable customs rules and regulations,” Williams said.
[snip]
Ultimately, the impact of the end of the de minimis exemption will extend beyond U.S. businesses, according to Kleijwegt. “With de minimis scrapped, EU exporters now face tariffs on low-value items, added customs paperwork, and higher shipping costs when selling to the US. U.S. small businesses now lose out on cheaper European sourcing, while smaller EU firms lose easy duty-free access, which has huge implications for market access on both sides of the Atlantic,” he said.
CNBC News (08/29/2025).
This isn’t tariff related but my connecting them will become clearer, after posting it…
Medicare will require prior authorizations, outsourcing the screening to private AI companies.
— Melanie D'Arrigo (@DarrigoMelanie) August 29, 2025
These firms are financially incentivized to deny claims—earning money from every denial.
They’ll let seniors suffer and die so AI tech bros can profit.https://t.co/xRPFP1zzz2
The federal government plans to hire private companies to use artificial intelligence to determine whether patients would be covered for some procedures, like certain spine surgeries or steroid injections. Similar algorithms used by insurers have been the subject of several high-profile lawsuits, which have asserted that the technology allowed the companies to swiftly deny large batches of claims and cut patients off from care in rehabilitation facilities.
The A.I. companies selected to oversee the program would have a strong financial incentive to deny claims. Medicare plans to pay them a share of the savings generated from rejections.
[snip]
Abe Sutton, the director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, said that the government would not review emergency services or hospital stays.
Mr. Sutton said the government experiment would examine practices that were particularly expensive or potentially harmful to patients. “This is what prior authorization should be,” he said.
[snip]
People enrolled in traditional Medicare who live in Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas and Washington State will be included in the experiment, which is expected to start in January and last for six years.
[snip]
Government officials said that any denials would be done by “an appropriately licensed human clinician, not a machine.”
Mr. Sutton also emphasized that the government could penalize companies for inappropriate decisions.
[snip]
Contractors hired by the government are supposed to watch over payments to ward against inappropriate or wasteful coverage. Those reviews generally happened after someone had received a treatment, though the Biden administration instituted a modest pre-approval program that did not use A.I.
New York Times (gift link). 08/28/2025.
Here’s the bottom line: Pretty much connecting all the moves from this admin so far…
They want us weaker, not stronger.
They want us poorer, not richer.
They want us hopeless, not hopeful.
In order for us to accept a dictatorship in full terms of what that means, we need to be exhausted, unhealthy, and poor; in some cases, dead.
I know that sounds dramatic. It is. Doesn’t make it less true.
This is an open thread
