Trump set to roll back Obama's clean water rule

[dudmuck]

translation: Allowing big business to pollute just so they can save a few bucks. When big business tells Republicans to jump, they just ask how high. Maybe a little socialism would not be bad.

This has nothing to do with big business. It has to do with the EPA regulating the property of small owners to the point where their land is useless to them.

12,000 more cancer deaths: poison your own kids to own the libs.

better dead than democrat.

Communist propaganda.

CourtHouseNews is the least biased source ever.

Farms more productive, poisoning drinking water, but i'm sure WSJ is communist too.

Media bias/Fact Check is a biased source, dumbass. You used one bias source to claim another source isn't biased. That's how leftwing propaganda works. All theses organs have an incestuous relationship with each other. Farmers have been fertilizing their fields since the Revolution, and that has almost nothing to do with the EPA's new "clean water" rule.

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

 

[bripat9643]

Agree on some of the over kill in the Clean water act, the solution is not to retaliate buy going in the opposite direction and giving all the big dollar polluters a free pass too dump there waste in our rivers & streams too save them the money it would cost to do a good job of cleaning up their messes.

No one's getting a "free pass," dumbass. All the existing regulations are still in place. This doesn't affect any stream, even if it's dry 90% of the time, that flows into a major body of water.

 

[bripat9643]

This has nothing to do with big business. It has to do with the EPA regulating the property of small owners to the point where their land is useless to them.

12,000 more cancer deaths: poison your own kids to own the libs.

better dead than democrat.

Communist propaganda.

CourtHouseNews is the least biased source ever.

Farms more productive, poisoning drinking water, but i'm sure WSJ is communist too.

Media bias/Fact Check is a biased source, dumbass. You used one bias source to claim another source isn't biased. That's how leftwing propaganda works. All theses organs have an incestuous relationship with each other. Farmers have been fertilizing their fields since the Revolution, and that has almost nothing to do with the EPA's new "clean water" rule.

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

 

[AntonToo]

wanting clean water totally escapes me - I mean WHY? Thats got to be the biggest nightmare on the planet.

It was unconstitutional.

I thought courts descide that, not an orange clown.

A court did decide that, I believe. Take a quick google

If court decided that it then why does admin need to interfere?

Nonsense.

Just google and look

I did, courts DID NOT rule it unconstitutional.

 

[dudmuck]

12,000 more cancer deaths: poison your own kids to own the libs.

better dead than democrat.

Communist propaganda.

CourtHouseNews is the least biased source ever.

Farms more productive, poisoning drinking water, but i'm sure WSJ is communist too.

Media bias/Fact Check is a biased source, dumbass. You used one bias source to claim another source isn't biased. That's how leftwing propaganda works. All theses organs have an incestuous relationship with each other. Farmers have been fertilizing their fields since the Revolution, and that has almost nothing to do with the EPA's new "clean water" rule.

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

 

[longknife]

Yet one more piece of Obama's legacy falls by the wayside. This will return power to the hands of the landowners.

"The Trump administration is expected to complete on Thursday a new rule that rolls back parts of the 2015 clean water rule that expanded federal authority over the nation’s streams, rivers and wetlands...."

"...The new rule would reduce the number of waterways the federal government can protect from pollution, as it seeks to appease industry groups and conservative lawmakers who criticized the regulations as a federal land grab that created uncertainty for industry and landowners.

Opponents have also argued the 2015 rule encroached on private property rights and subjected small farmers to added government scrutiny and the risk of legal entanglements."

Trump administration expected to roll back clean water rule

EPA Repeals 2015 Rule Defining “Waters of the United States”

Another Obozo overreach repealed by the Trump administration. Another promise kept.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army announced today that the agencies are repealing a 2015 rule that impermissibly expanded the definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act. The agencies are also recodifying the longstanding and familiar regulatory text that existed prior to the 2015 Rule, ending a regulatory patchwork that required implementing two competing Clean Water Act regulations, which has created regulatory uncertainty across the United States.

Maybe farmers will no longer be fined for having ponds on their own properties.

“Repealing the WOTUS rule is a major win for American agriculture. The extreme overreach from the past Administration had government taking the productivity of the land people had worked for years,” Secretary Perdue said. “Farmers and ranchers are exceptional stewards of the land, taking great care to preserve it for generations to come. President Trump is making good on his promise to reduce burdensome regulations to free our producers to do what they do best – feed, fuel, and clothe this nation and the world.”

More w/links @ EPA Repeals 2015 Rule Defining “Waters of the United States”

 

[bripat9643]

Communist propaganda.

CourtHouseNews is the least biased source ever.

Farms more productive, poisoning drinking water, but i'm sure WSJ is communist too.

Media bias/Fact Check is a biased source, dumbass. You used one bias source to claim another source isn't biased. That's how leftwing propaganda works. All theses organs have an incestuous relationship with each other. Farmers have been fertilizing their fields since the Revolution, and that has almost nothing to do with the EPA's new "clean water" rule.

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

There is absolutely no evidence that trace amounts of nitrates, or any other toxin, causes cancer. None.

 

[dudmuck]

CourtHouseNews is the least biased source ever.

Farms more productive, poisoning drinking water, but i'm sure WSJ is communist too.

Media bias/Fact Check is a biased source, dumbass. You used one bias source to claim another source isn't biased. That's how leftwing propaganda works. All theses organs have an incestuous relationship with each other. Farmers have been fertilizing their fields since the Revolution, and that has almost nothing to do with the EPA's new "clean water" rule.

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

There is absolutely no evidence that trace amounts of nitrates, or any other toxin, causes cancer. None.

Its documented here. Nitrates in water.

But farm runoff has more toxins than just nitrates.

Cancer risk doubled.

 

[bripat9643]

Media bias/Fact Check is a biased source, dumbass. You used one bias source to claim another source isn't biased. That's how leftwing propaganda works. All theses organs have an incestuous relationship with each other. Farmers have been fertilizing their fields since the Revolution, and that has almost nothing to do with the EPA's new "clean water" rule.

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

There is absolutely no evidence that trace amounts of nitrates, or any other toxin, causes cancer. None.

Its documented here. Nitrates in water.

But farm runoff has more toxins than just nitrates.

Cancer risk doubled.

Your article is about EXCESSIVE nitrates. It discusses almost elusively people who live in rural areas, and it has no proof that a given dose will cause cancer. Farmers are already taking steps to reduce the amount of nitrates they use via satellite photos and digital application of fertilizer.

Furthermore, a puddle in my backyard has no relevance to the agricultural application of nitrates to crops.

A 2010 study led by Dr. Mary Ward of the National Cancer Institute found that public water supplies high in nitrates were linked to a more than doubling of thyroid cancer risk. And in a 2001 study led by Peter Weyer at the University of Iowa, nitrate contamination in water was associated with almost tripling the risk of bladder cancer and almost doubling the risk of ovarian cancer. ​

No definition of the term "high in nitrates" or "nitrate contamination" are given. As usual, with eco-nutburger propaganda, all the terms used are vague to the point of being utterly meaningless.

Furthermore, these studies are all based on the premise that if a high dose of a substance causes cancer, then a low dose causes a proportionally lower amount of cancer. Of course, that premise has never been proven, and a lot of evidence indicates that it's patently false.

 

[lennypartiv]

Hurrah! One more job killing anti pollution law put in place by Obama is gone.

 

[dudmuck]

Farmers havent been using toxins since the revolution.

media bias fact check lists plenty of left-wing sites.
They list CNN as left with mixed factual reporting. Likewise for MSNBC and daily kos.

Courthouse news is used by law firms, they cant be biased or they'd be useless.

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

There is absolutely no evidence that trace amounts of nitrates, or any other toxin, causes cancer. None.

Its documented here. Nitrates in water.

But farm runoff has more toxins than just nitrates.

Cancer risk doubled.

Your article is about EXCESSIVE nitrates. It discusses almost elusively people who live in rural areas, and it has no proof that a given dose will cause cancer. Farmers are already taking steps to reduce the amount of nitrates they use via satellite photos and digital application of fertilizer.

Furthermore, a puddle in my backyard has no relevance to the agricultural application of nitrates to crops.

A 2010 study led by Dr. Mary Ward of the National Cancer Institute found that public water supplies high in nitrates were linked to a more than doubling of thyroid cancer risk. And in a 2001 study led by Peter Weyer at the University of Iowa, nitrate contamination in water was associated with almost tripling the risk of bladder cancer and almost doubling the risk of ovarian cancer. ​

No definition of the term "high in nitrates" or "nitrate contamination" are given. As usual, with eco-nutburger propaganda, all the terms used are vague to the point of being utterly meaningless.

Furthermore, these studies are all based on the premise that if a high dose of a substance causes cancer, then a low dose causes a proportionally lower amount of cancer. Of course, that premise has never been proven, and a lot of evidence indicates that it's patently false.

It says in the linked study, that the nitrate threshold was 5 milligrams per liter.

 

[bripat9643]

If you believe nitrates are toxins, then you believe chicken shit and cow manure are toxins.

You're a fucking dumbass.

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

There is absolutely no evidence that trace amounts of nitrates, or any other toxin, causes cancer. None.

Its documented here. Nitrates in water.

But farm runoff has more toxins than just nitrates.

Cancer risk doubled.

Your article is about EXCESSIVE nitrates. It discusses almost elusively people who live in rural areas, and it has no proof that a given dose will cause cancer. Farmers are already taking steps to reduce the amount of nitrates they use via satellite photos and digital application of fertilizer.

Furthermore, a puddle in my backyard has no relevance to the agricultural application of nitrates to crops.

A 2010 study led by Dr. Mary Ward of the National Cancer Institute found that public water supplies high in nitrates were linked to a more than doubling of thyroid cancer risk. And in a 2001 study led by Peter Weyer at the University of Iowa, nitrate contamination in water was associated with almost tripling the risk of bladder cancer and almost doubling the risk of ovarian cancer. ​

No definition of the term "high in nitrates" or "nitrate contamination" are given. As usual, with eco-nutburger propaganda, all the terms used are vague to the point of being utterly meaningless.

Furthermore, these studies are all based on the premise that if a high dose of a substance causes cancer, then a low dose causes a proportionally lower amount of cancer. Of course, that premise has never been proven, and a lot of evidence indicates that it's patently false.

It says in the linked study, that the nitrate threshold was 5 milligrams per liter.

"Threshold" for what?

 

[dudmuck]

The report said 80% of the nitrate-related cancers were colorectal, with ovarian, thyroid, kidney and bladder cancer accounting for the rest. Treatment costs up to $1.5 billion a year, according to the report.

There is absolutely no evidence that trace amounts of nitrates, or any other toxin, causes cancer. None.

Its documented here. Nitrates in water.

But farm runoff has more toxins than just nitrates.

Cancer risk doubled.

Your article is about EXCESSIVE nitrates. It discusses almost elusively people who live in rural areas, and it has no proof that a given dose will cause cancer. Farmers are already taking steps to reduce the amount of nitrates they use via satellite photos and digital application of fertilizer.

Furthermore, a puddle in my backyard has no relevance to the agricultural application of nitrates to crops.

A 2010 study led by Dr. Mary Ward of the National Cancer Institute found that public water supplies high in nitrates were linked to a more than doubling of thyroid cancer risk. And in a 2001 study led by Peter Weyer at the University of Iowa, nitrate contamination in water was associated with almost tripling the risk of bladder cancer and almost doubling the risk of ovarian cancer. ​

No definition of the term "high in nitrates" or "nitrate contamination" are given. As usual, with eco-nutburger propaganda, all the terms used are vague to the point of being utterly meaningless.

Furthermore, these studies are all based on the premise that if a high dose of a substance causes cancer, then a low dose causes a proportionally lower amount of cancer. Of course, that premise has never been proven, and a lot of evidence indicates that it's patently false.

It says in the linked study, that the nitrate threshold was 5 milligrams per liter.

"Threshold" for what?

Threshold for increased risk of thyroid cancer. 2.6 times the probability of getting thyroid cancer when nitrates exceed 5 milligrams per liter over 5 years.