What is in it for Trump when he does this kind of stuff? (Details.)

(This came up in Meta where I don’t think it belongs.)

I read about this too and I can’t see any justification for it except that they are looking to take down the world with them as they go. Reading the whole article it seems they are looking to protect industry (yet again) from any culpability in the deaths of wild birds – this at a time when bird populations are already declining. It is infuriating. Republicans at one time were a party for conservation of natural resources. The next administration will have to spend all their time looking under rocks to kill the snakes. Luckily, I suspect environmental organizations will keep this tied up in the courts until the next administration comes in.

It’s inexplicable and illogical like many of the things that he does. Yet, even more illogical is that his supporters still love him to pieces.

It is to ingratiate himself to industrialists.
These passages makes it clear:
“The proposal would end the government’s decades-long practice of treating accidental bird deaths caused by industry as potential criminal violations under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.”

and

“However, the Trump administration has said the deaths of birds that fly into oil pits, mining sites, telecommunications towers, wind turbines and other hazards should be treated as accidents not subject to prosecution.”

Can you ever in your life recall an individual so dedicated and dependably determined to find the meanest least charitable approach to EVERYTHING? Kill more birds, burn more coal, cage more kids, gas more protesters, beggar the W H O, ....

He is simply a horrible human being. Oh, the abuses he must have suffered to end up that way.

I think there are some discrepancies in the report cited. It talks about the Trump Administration wanting to “scale back” the law protecting birds. The problem with this is that the Trump Administration cannot “scale back” a law. The MBTA is actually federal law under 16 USC 703–712. Changing the law is not in the purview of the Executive Branch…it falls to Congress to do that. The article goes on to say “The proposal would end the government’s decades-long practice of treating accidental bird deaths caused by industry as potential criminal violations under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.”. A proposal cannot do any of this. Again…it would take Congressional intercession to change the law that much. The only thing the Executive Branch can do is decide how many resources it wants to throw at enforcing that law. But it is like that with every law. However, all industries (and individuals) in the US fall under the rule of law and would continue to do so until such time as the law is abolished. So it looks like the article is more of a scare tactic than a realistic, factual concern. I wonder why they didn’t actually link the “proposal” being considered?
I have actually had to deal with the MBTA in real life. Working for a power plant, there were all sorts of things that fell under that umbrella. Any bird that was injured or killed had to be reported, photographed, and buried (preferably) or disposed of. And it didn’t matter if it was killed by a predator, flew into a building, died of old age, or what. You had to account for them. At one point we had to do repairs to electronic equipment on our meteorology tower but had to delay it because a hawk had built a nest at the top of the tower and there were babies in it. That work had to be put off for 2 months to allow the babies to get old enough to leave the nest before we could disturb it (take it down). By that time the hawks had abandoned the nest.

Congress is part of his administration.

@Dutchess_III typically when someone talks about a president’s administration they are talking about those departments that fall under his control Congress does not meet that criteria. In fact I don’t think I have ever heard anyone say Congress is part of a president’s administration.

The usual reference is Congress “under (or during) the so & so administration”

To elaborate on what @stanleybmanly and @seawulf575 have said, “Administration” is normally used to indicate the Executive Branch under a given president.