• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal Judge Begins the Teardown of EPA Regulations

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,342
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Coming just as the Trump administration prepares to take over the EPA, this order looks like a handy tool to set aside numerous rulings and regulations.


Not Tired Of Winning Yet

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach I’ve been discussing cost-benefit analyses lately. The AP has the story of a Federal judge who has just made a most excellent and far-reaching ruling regarding EPA cost-benefit analyses. He said that the EPA has to include the cost of lost jobs in the economic part of the cost-benefit analysis…

Continue reading →
. . . The judge said the EPA is required by law to analyze the economic impact on a continuing basis when enforcing the Clean Air Act and McCarthy’s response “evidences the continued hostility on the part of the EPA to acceptance of the mission established by Congress.”
Bailey ordered the EPA to identify facilities harmed by the regulations during the Obama presidency by July 1. That includes identifying facilities at risk of closure or reductions in employment.
… and …
The judge also set a Dec. 31 deadline for the EPA to provide documentation on how it is continuously evaluating the loss and shifts in employment that may result from administration and enforcement of the Clean Air Act.
The winningest part of this whole thing is that the judge said it doesn’t just apply to the coal rules. It applies to the whole Clean Air Act and by inference all of the EPA’s regulations.
Not only that, but his order specifically applies to any and every facility harmed during the Obama Administration by EPA regulations. Zowie! So there can be no doubt that it extends at least that far and farther.
And this in turn opens the door to overturning a whole host of existing regulations. All that needs to be done is to show that the cost of lost jobs was NOT considered in the EPA finding, and it would have to be reviewed … by the new Administration.
Finally, the judge spoke directly to the heart of the matter, saying:
“EPA does not get to decide whether compliance with (the law) is good policy, or would lead to too many difficulties for the agency,” Bailey wrote. “It is time for the EPA to recognize that Congress makes the law, and EPA must not only enforce the law, it must obey it.”

The AP article is here
 
If Trump does nothing during his presidency but defang the EPA and stop the regulatory madness, he will earn his place among the nations greatest presidents.
 
Coming just as the Trump administration prepares to take over the EPA, this order looks like a handy tool to set aside numerous rulings and regulations.


Not Tired Of Winning Yet

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach I’ve been discussing cost-benefit analyses lately. The AP has the story of a Federal judge who has just made a most excellent and far-reaching ruling regarding EPA cost-benefit analyses. He said that the EPA has to include the cost of lost jobs in the economic part of the cost-benefit analysis…

Continue reading →
. . . The judge said the EPA is required by law to analyze the economic impact on a continuing basis when enforcing the Clean Air Act and McCarthy’s response “evidences the continued hostility on the part of the EPA to acceptance of the mission established by Congress.”
Bailey ordered the EPA to identify facilities harmed by the regulations during the Obama presidency by July 1. That includes identifying facilities at risk of closure or reductions in employment.
… and …
The judge also set a Dec. 31 deadline for the EPA to provide documentation on how it is continuously evaluating the loss and shifts in employment that may result from administration and enforcement of the Clean Air Act.
The winningest part of this whole thing is that the judge said it doesn’t just apply to the coal rules. It applies to the whole Clean Air Act and by inference all of the EPA’s regulations.
Not only that, but his order specifically applies to any and every facility harmed during the Obama Administration by EPA regulations. Zowie! So there can be no doubt that it extends at least that far and farther.
And this in turn opens the door to overturning a whole host of existing regulations. All that needs to be done is to show that the cost of lost jobs was NOT considered in the EPA finding, and it would have to be reviewed … by the new Administration.
Finally, the judge spoke directly to the heart of the matter, saying:
“EPA does not get to decide whether compliance with (the law) is good policy, or would lead to too many difficulties for the agency,” Bailey wrote. “It is time for the EPA to recognize that Congress makes the law, and EPA must not only enforce the law, it must obey it.”

The AP article is here

I am all for tearing out all the nonsensical regulations.
 
If Trump does nothing during his presidency but defang the EPA and stop the regulatory madness, he will earn his place among the nations greatest presidents.

Yes we need more dirty air and dirty water.
 
Yes we need more dirty air and dirty water.

Typical liberal response--either support every EPA rule that comes along or you are for dirty air and dirty water. Its getting harder to have intelligent interactions with you guys.
 
Yes we need more dirty air and dirty water.

From the OP:

Perhaps the EPA can get back to the actual environmental issues that all of us care about, liberal and conservative alike, the real issues of clean air and clean water.
 
Typical liberal response--either support every EPA rule that comes along or you are for dirty air and dirty water. Its getting harder to have intelligent interactions with you guys.

You guys are the one ms wanting deregulation so corporate companies can do what they want when they want with no regulations. Your agenda is quite transparent as you worship the almighty dollar over everything. Cons conserve NOTHING.
 
From the OP:

Perhaps the EPA can get back to the actual environmental issues that all of us care about, liberal and conservative alike, the real issues of clean air and clean water.

Except you put a conman in charge that will swing everything to non regulations at all.
 
You guys are the one ms wanting deregulation so corporate companies can do what they want when they want with no regulations. Your agenda is quite transparent as you worship the almighty dollar over everything. Cons conserve NOTHING.

Nobody is saying this, only you.
 
Yes we need more dirty air and dirty water.

hey, look at the upside : there will be a lot of new well-paying jobs at future superfund sites.
 
Coming just as the Trump administration prepares to take over the EPA, this order looks like a handy tool to set aside numerous rulings and regulations.


Not Tired Of Winning Yet

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach I’ve been discussing cost-benefit analyses lately. The AP has the story of a Federal judge who has just made a most excellent and far-reaching ruling regarding EPA cost-benefit analyses. He said that the EPA has to include the cost of lost jobs in the economic part of the cost-benefit analysis…

Continue reading →
. . . The judge said the EPA is required by law to analyze the economic impact on a continuing basis when enforcing the Clean Air Act and McCarthy’s response “evidences the continued hostility on the part of the EPA to acceptance of the mission established by Congress.”
Bailey ordered the EPA to identify facilities harmed by the regulations during the Obama presidency by July 1. That includes identifying facilities at risk of closure or reductions in employment.
… and …
The judge also set a Dec. 31 deadline for the EPA to provide documentation on how it is continuously evaluating the loss and shifts in employment that may result from administration and enforcement of the Clean Air Act.
The winningest part of this whole thing is that the judge said it doesn’t just apply to the coal rules. It applies to the whole Clean Air Act and by inference all of the EPA’s regulations.
Not only that, but his order specifically applies to any and every facility harmed during the Obama Administration by EPA regulations. Zowie! So there can be no doubt that it extends at least that far and farther.
And this in turn opens the door to overturning a whole host of existing regulations. All that needs to be done is to show that the cost of lost jobs was NOT considered in the EPA finding, and it would have to be reviewed … by the new Administration.
Finally, the judge spoke directly to the heart of the matter, saying:
“EPA does not get to decide whether compliance with (the law) is good policy, or would lead to too many difficulties for the agency,” Bailey wrote. “It is time for the EPA to recognize that Congress makes the law, and EPA must not only enforce the law, it must obey it.”

The AP article is here

That's true! The Chinese live happy healthy lives without environmental regulations!

China Pollution.jpg



And why DO we need the EPA anyway? Los Angels was fine in the old days.

L.A. Pollution.jpg

We just let industry police itself - right?
 
From the OP:

Perhaps the EPA can get back to the actual environmental issues that all of us care about, liberal and conservative alike, the real issues of clean air and clean water.

As long as the "clean air and water" don't cost any jobs though...Right?
 
If Trump does nothing during his presidency but defang the EPA and stop the regulatory madness, he will earn his place among the nations greatest presidents.

He will absolutely do that when he drains the EPA swamp of it's political tendencies. Pruitt is just the guy to take care of that for Trump.
 
Google pictures of L.A. during the 60's.

I am 100% sure that the whole conservative agenda nowadays is to be against anything that even 'hints' at being liberal. Even if it benefits conservatives and people if it 'hints' of being liberal Cons will be against it.

Their whole ideology is nothing but hate. Sad, because in many cases all they are doing is cutting their own GD throats.
 
You guys are the one ms wanting deregulation so corporate companies can do what they want when they want with no regulations. Your agenda is quite transparent as you worship the almighty dollar over everything. Cons conserve NOTHING.

Again with the phony argument. Reducing regulations =/= no regulations. Seriously, is honest debate something you are even capable of?
 
Google pictures of L.A. during the 60's.

I am 100% sure that the whole conservative agenda nowadays is to be against anything that even 'hints' at being liberal. Even if it benefits conservatives and people if it 'hints' of being liberal Cons will be against it.

Their whole ideology is nothing but hate. Sad, because in many cases all they are doing is cutting their own GD throats.
If you are trying to win DP awards for stupid posts you might want to hold your fire. Its only January. Save this sort of nonsense for the end of the year when it will be fresh in the minds of the judges.
 
Google pictures of L.A. during the 60's.

I am 100% sure that the whole conservative agenda nowadays is to be against anything that even 'hints' at being liberal. Even if it benefits conservatives and people if it 'hints' of being liberal Cons will be against it.

Their whole ideology is nothing but hate. Sad, because in many cases all they are doing is cutting their own GD throats.

I think you give too much credit to the liberals.

The EPA was proposed by President Richard Nixon and began operation on December 2, 1970, after Nixon signed an executive order. The order establishing the EPA was ratified by committee hearings in the House and Senate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency

The EPA isn't considered to be bad by conservatives and they have no agenda against its core principles or duties. Conservatives ARE against that which the liberals have turned the organization into...which is a politically-driven tool to advance their own agenda.
 
I think you give too much credit to the liberals.



The EPA isn't considered to be bad by conservatives and they have no agenda against its core principles or duties. Conservatives ARE against that which the liberals have turned the organization into...which is a politically-driven tool to advance their own agenda.

Comparing the Republican Party of the 60's and 70's to the lunatics running the GOP NOW? You are insulting old time true conservative Republicans like Nixon, or even Reagan.

Reagan must be spinning in his grave seeing someone like Trump and his buddy Putin heading the current GOP. lol
 
Comparing the Republican Party of the 60's and 70's to the lunatics running the GOP NOW? You are insulting old time true conservative Republicans like Nixon, or even Reagan.

Reagan must be spinning in his grave seeing someone like Trump and his buddy Putin heading the current GOP. lol

Okaayyy.

You have nothing to rebut my comment with, so you settle with spouting nonsense.

Have it your way...on your own.
 
He will absolutely do that when he drains the EPA swamp of it's political tendencies. Pruitt is just the guy to take care of that for Trump.

You must be really tired with all that sloganeering you're spewing today.
 
Again with the phony argument. Reducing regulations =/= no regulations. Seriously, is honest debate something you are even capable of?

No trump supporter is ever capable of honest debate so no we don't trust you at all.
 
Back
Top Bottom