Lots has changed-but about this topic? I don’t see evidence much has changed about this one. It remains, then as now, an idea some people in the GOP support, but they are still struggling to get everyone else on board.
> And you're not arguing in bad faith?
The HN guidelines say “Assume good faith”. [0] I don’t think your suggesting I’m “arguing in bad faith” is complying with that guideline.
> He already tried appointing the AccuWeather CEO for the job last time, who mostly wanted to privatize the NWS.
We don’t know why he nominated Myers. It isn’t necessarily because he personally supports this particular policy agenda. It could simply because some advisor talked the guy up to him. That advisor might have supported the agenda in question, but might have sold the candidate to Trump on other grounds.
And the fact that the Senate never called a confirmation vote on him implies that GOP Senators weren’t happy with the nomination behind the scenes. Which is evidence against your narrative that the GOP is 100% behind this agenda.
Furthermore, even if Myers had been confirmed, the NOAA Administrator doesn’t have the power to defund or abolish or privatize his own agency - only Congress can do that. So even if they’d won the battle to install Myers, it might not have actually done much to advance that policy agenda.