EPA up for the ax???

[BOBO]

Congresswoman Michele 'Hitman' Bachmann desires to see industry grow in the USA(so does everyone else!). On top of making the USA a low tax nation for industries to set up business in, the 'Hitman' wants to 'squelch' the EPA to make it easier for business to relocate in country. The EPA, never popular with the rank & file tax paying constituency in the 1st place would be an easy target in an era of tight budgets & high unemployment. I mean who cares about wetland zoning when one is living in the back seat of their vehicle???
My question is, considering the dismal financial situation in country... is the EPA an easy target to start with in eliminating the 'fat' in federal government? It's come down to managing wetlands or keeping a roof over ones head & food on the table. What's your opinion on this one???

 

[Seawytch]

Yeah, screw the air we breathe and the water we drink in the long run as long as we create some coal mining jobs in the short term, right?

Just think how you can amuse the kids (as they are struggling to breathe due to the pollution in the air) by lighting the water in the sink on fire. YAY!

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yeah, screw the air we breathe and the water we drink in the long run as long as we create some coal mining jobs in the short term, right?

Just think how you can amuse the kids (as they are struggling to breathe due to the pollution in the air) by lighting the water in the sink on fire. YAY!

Thanks, Captain Straw Man

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah, screw the air we breathe and the water we drink in the long run as long as we create some coal mining jobs in the short term, right?

Just think how you can amuse the kids (as they are struggling to breathe due to the pollution in the air) by lighting the water in the sink on fire. YAY!

How much cleaner is the water and air in the last 20 years? How much of that was due to EPA regs?

I realize the Obamarrhoids think "hey screw the working man" but permanent unemployment isn't a solution for anyone.

Yes, the EPA has become essentially a rogue agency, passing what ought to be legislation simply by regulatory fiat. They are unelected and unaccountable. Cutting their budget by 75% would go a long way towards helping the economy.

 

[peach174]

EPA has 91 tests for contaminates and the majority of them are not necessary.
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/consumer/pdf/mcl.pdf
These tests cost you anywhere from 6.00 to 10.00 dollars each and every month.
The cost on businesses is killing our economy
How Much Will EPA Regulation of Carbon Cost? | Stop the Energy Tax | American Solutions
We were not dieing by the millions before the EPA. We need to get back to local monitoring by cities and counties. Tests that are necessary by areas and not the whole Unites States.
We have very good water filters now that take care of containments.
Yes we should get rid of this overbearing and very costly agency.

 

[Robert]

Congresswoman Michele 'Hitman' Bachmann desires to see industry grow in the USA(so does everyone else!). On top of making the USA a low tax nation for industries to set up business in, the 'Hitman' wants to 'squelch' the EPA to make it easier for business to relocate in country. The EPA, never popular with the rank & file tax paying constituency in the 1st place would be an easy target in an era of tight budgets & high unemployment. I mean who cares about wetland zoning when one is living in the back seat of their vehicle???
My question is, considering the dismal financial situation in country... is the EPA an easy target to start with in eliminating the 'fat' in federal government? It's come down to managing wetlands or keeping a roof over ones head & food on the table. What's your opinion on this one???

Gosh that's a tough one let's see "wetlands" or millions of Starving Citizens of this Nation.....oh this is going to take some time....can I get back to you?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'd love to see the EPA de-funded... along with the DEA, DoE, etc. These agencies are nothing more than far-left political agencies funded by the American taxpayer.

 

[8537]

Yeah, screw the air we breathe and the water we drink in the long run as long as we create some coal mining jobs in the short term, right?

Just think how you can amuse the kids (as they are struggling to breathe due to the pollution in the air) by lighting the water in the sink on fire. YAY!

How much cleaner is the water and air in the last 20 years? How much of that was due to EPA regs?
.

a lot - a WHOLE lot. The Clean Water act is one of the most successful pieces of legislation in history. The Northern Forests cap and trade program has successfully brought the Adirondacks back from the brink of collapse.

And who drew the regs for those efforts? The EPA.

 

[Avatar4321]

Let's see, the Constitution doesn't authorize the Federal government to regulate the environment, thus the EPA is completely unconstitutional and the power to regulate the environment is only in the scope of the State's power.

Maybe you guys should stop relying on emotional arguments and actually end the corruption in our government when the wrong politicians try to steal power from the correct agencies. You've lost your freedom because of your corruption.

 

[konradv]

Congresswoman Michele 'Hitman' Bachmann desires to see industry grow in the USA(so does everyone else!). On top of making the USA a low tax nation for industries to set up business in, the 'Hitman' wants to 'squelch' the EPA to make it easier for business to relocate in country. The EPA, never popular with the rank & file tax paying constituency in the 1st place would be an easy target in an era of tight budgets & high unemployment. I mean who cares about wetland zoning when one is living in the back seat of their vehicle???
My question is, considering the dismal financial situation in country... is the EPA an easy target to start with in eliminating the 'fat' in federal government? It's come down to managing wetlands or keeping a roof over ones head & food on the table. What's your opinion on this one???

This is good reason to make sure linbertarians never get control of the government. We're asked "who cares about wetland zoning when one is living in the back seat of their vehicle???", as if there aren't worse things, like not being able to breathe the air or drink the water. It's not an either/or question, IMO, regardless of the claims that we'll be better off. Time and time again we've seen that, without oversight the concerns over the health of the people and the environment takes a back seat to the bottom line. THAT'S the REAL concern of libertarians, NOT whether or not you're living in your car. As a matter of fact they usually sneer at people like that, characterizing them as "undeserving" and "lazy" for getting in that position in the first place. Don't be fooled by their "concern". That usually only extends to their own pocketbook!

 

[The Rabbi]

Yeah, screw the air we breathe and the water we drink in the long run as long as we create some coal mining jobs in the short term, right?

Just think how you can amuse the kids (as they are struggling to breathe due to the pollution in the air) by lighting the water in the sink on fire. YAY!

How much cleaner is the water and air in the last 20 years? How much of that was due to EPA regs?
.

a lot - a WHOLE lot. The Clean Water act is one of the most successful pieces of legislation in history. The Northern Forests cap and trade program has successfully brought the Adirondacks back from the brink of collapse.

And who drew the regs for those efforts? The EPA.

Clean water Act 1972. Summary of the Clean Water Act | Laws and Regulations | US EPA

FAIL.

 

[American Legacy]

Killing the EPA would go a long way towards creating jobs and growing the economy, while making a negligible difference in the quality of the environment.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Yeah, screw the air we breathe and the water we drink in the long run as long as we create some coal mining jobs in the short term, right?

Just think how you can amuse the kids (as they are struggling to breathe due to the pollution in the air) by lighting the water in the sink on fire. YAY!

^^^^ Stereo typical responce from the non-thinking left ^^^^


W/o the epa we still have vast regualations that will be enforced. w/ the tyranny of such an overly powerfull group they will make CO2 a pollutant. By doing that they will greatly increase the cost of goods, this increase will get passed down to the consumer, this will greatly impact the poor and middle classes.

but knee jerking morons say we will all suffer w/o it, so it will stay and we will be crushed under the inability to compete with other nations.

 

[konradv]

Let's see, the Constitution doesn't authorize the Federal government to regulate the environment, thus the EPA is completely unconstitutional and the power to regulate the environment is only in the scope of the State's power.

Maybe you guys should stop relying on emotional arguments and actually end the corruption in our government when the wrong politicians try to steal power from the correct agencies. You've lost your freedom because of your corruption.

You're wrong about that. The EPA is easily covered by the General Welfare AND Interstate Commerce clauses.

If you're worried about corruption, don't look to the agencies that are trying to keep us safe and healthy, but to how we finance elections. If we went to public financing, our representitives wouldn't have to spend so much time drumming up campaign contributrions and selling their vote to whomever can bundle the highest amount.

 

[Mr Natural]

Killing the EPA would go a long way towards creating jobs and growing the economy, while making a negligible difference in the quality of the environment.

That's right!

Because corporations will gladly and willingly police themselves.

 

[8537]

How much cleaner is the water and air in the last 20 years? How much of that was due to EPA regs?
.

a lot - a WHOLE lot. The Clean Water act is one of the most successful pieces of legislation in history. The Northern Forests cap and trade program has successfully brought the Adirondacks back from the brink of collapse.

And who drew the regs for those efforts? The EPA.

Clean water Act 1972. Summary of the Clean Water Act | Laws and Regulations | US EPA

FAIL.

Yes, by linking to information about the clean water act you prove that the clean water act was a failure.

What the fuck are you talking about?

 

[konradv]

Killing the EPA would go a long way towards creating jobs and growing the economy, while making a negligible difference in the quality of the environment.

Do we really want to put our lives into the hands of the Libertarian Faith? Here we're told there would be "a negligible difference in the quality of the environment". No cite!!! I guess that's revelation from on high! Who gave you this "revelation", St.Ronald or St.Ayn?

 

[The Rabbi]

a lot - a WHOLE lot. The Clean Water act is one of the most successful pieces of legislation in history. The Northern Forests cap and trade program has successfully brought the Adirondacks back from the brink of collapse.

And who drew the regs for those efforts? The EPA.

Clean water Act 1972. Summary of the Clean Water Act | Laws and Regulations | US EPA

FAIL.

Yes, by linking to information about the clean water act you prove that the clean water act was a failure.

What the fuck are you talking about?

No, idiot. YOU"RE the failure here. I wrote "in the last 20 years" and you throw a piece of legislation that is nearly 40 years old out.
You're on a role this morning. The role of the shmendrick who can't get his own name right.

 

[Avatar4321]

Let's see, the Constitution doesn't authorize the Federal government to regulate the environment, thus the EPA is completely unconstitutional and the power to regulate the environment is only in the scope of the State's power.

Maybe you guys should stop relying on emotional arguments and actually end the corruption in our government when the wrong politicians try to steal power from the correct agencies. You've lost your freedom because of your corruption.

You're wrong about that. The EPA is easily covered by the General Welfare AND Interstate Commerce clauses.

If you're worried about corruption, don't look to the agencies that are trying to keep us safe and healthy, but to how we finance elections. If we went to public financing, our representitives wouldn't have to spend so much time drumming up campaign contributrions and selling their vote to whomever can bundle the highest amount.

The EPA is not interstate commerce. And the "general welfare" clause isnt a grant of power.

 

[8537]

Clean water Act 1972. Summary of the Clean Water Act | Laws and Regulations | US EPA

FAIL.

Yes, by linking to information about the clean water act you prove that the clean water act was a failure.

What the fuck are you talking about?

No, idiot. YOU"RE the failure here. I wrote "in the last 20 years" and you throw a piece of legislation that is nearly 40 years old out.
You're on a role this morning. The role of the shmendrick who can't get his own name right.

My god, are you really this stupid? Just because the act was passed in 1972 doesn't mean it quit playing a role in cleaning the environment the next year. In fact, it plays a crucial role in cleanups throughout the country to this day.

...As does the Northeast forests cap and trade program in regards to its range.