Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump

Media_Truth · Aug 10, 2017

This isn't surprising to me, with Scott Pruitt as EPA Director. Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project and former Director of Civil Enforcement at EPA, assessed the situation well, "President Trump campaigned on a promise of 'law and order,' but apparently law enforcement for big polluters is not what he had in mind..."

Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump : NPR

Since President Trump took office in January, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped dramatically, compared with past administrations. A study released by the Environmental Integrity Project finds that $12 million in civil penalties have been collected from violators in 26 cases between January and the end of July.

That's significantly less than the number of cases prosecuted and the penalties collected under the same six month period by the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. Under Barack Obama, the Justice Department prosecuted 34 cases, collecting $36 million in the time period. Under George W. Bush, 31 cases were lodged, bringing in $30 million in penalties. Under Bill Clinton, there were 45 cases filed, with penalties totaling $25 million.

So far, penalties collected by Trump's EPA are 60 percent lower than the average of the three previous administrations.

joG · Aug 11, 2017

Media_Truth said:
This isn't surprising to me, with Scott Pruitt as EPA Director. Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project and former Director of Civil Enforcement at EPA, assessed the situation well, "President Trump campaigned on a promise of 'law and order,' but apparently law enforcement for big polluters is not what he had in mind..."

Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump : NPR

Since President Trump took office in January, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped dramatically, compared with past administrations. A study released by the Environmental Integrity Project finds that $12 million in civil penalties have been collected from violators in 26 cases between January and the end of July.

That's significantly less than the number of cases prosecuted and the penalties collected under the same six month period by the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. Under Barack Obama, the Justice Department prosecuted 34 cases, collecting $36 million in the time period. Under George W. Bush, 31 cases were lodged, bringing in $30 million in penalties. Under Bill Clinton, there were 45 cases filed, with penalties totaling $25 million.

So far, penalties collected by Trump's EPA are 60 percent lower than the average of the three previous administrations.

Maybe the development is not wrong. I would hope that the law was being enforced, but one should remember that the country's regulatory levels seem relatively high in many areas. I haven't done a meta study or anything, but have a number of times run into cases like the German diesel/NOx affair, where US regulation was much more restrictive than that of our economic competitors in Asia or even Europe. That means more expensive production and fewer jobs and larger trade deficits.

Media_Truth · Aug 11, 2017

joG said:
Maybe the development is not wrong. I would hope that the law was being enforced, but one should remember that the country's regulatory levels seem relatively high in many areas. I haven't done a meta study or anything, but have a number of times run into cases like the German diesel/NOx affair, where US regulation was much more restrictive than that of our economic competitors in Asia or even Europe. That means more expensive production and fewer jobs and larger trade deficits.

And you think that Scott Pruitt came into the EPA, and has discerned what levels should be tolerated in each of the 50 states, and is adjusting his policies accordingly? Each state or region of the country has it's own guidelines, and he'll decide what laws to enforce and which ones not to enforce?

joG · Aug 11, 2017

Media_Truth said:
And you think that Scott Pruitt came into the EPA, and has discerned what levels should be tolerated in each of the 50 states, and is adjusting his policies accordingly? Each state or region of the country has it's own guidelines, and he'll decide what laws to enforce and which ones not to enforce?

You really think that that is how it works?

Lord of Planar · Aug 11, 2017

Media_Truth said:
This isn't surprising to me, with Scott Pruitt as EPA Director. Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project and former Director of Civil Enforcement at EPA, assessed the situation well, "President Trump campaigned on a promise of 'law and order,' but apparently law enforcement for big polluters is not what he had in mind..."

Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump : NPR

Since President Trump took office in January, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped dramatically, compared with past administrations. A study released by the Environmental Integrity Project finds that $12 million in civil penalties have been collected from violators in 26 cases between January and the end of July.

That's significantly less than the number of cases prosecuted and the penalties collected under the same six month period by the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. Under Barack Obama, the Justice Department prosecuted 34 cases, collecting $36 million in the time period. Under George W. Bush, 31 cases were lodged, bringing in $30 million in penalties. Under Bill Clinton, there were 45 cases filed, with penalties totaling $25 million.

So far, penalties collected by Trump's EPA are 60 percent lower than the average of the three previous administrations.

Whoop-t-do...

Some of the crap they enforced that I heard about was stupid.

Media_Truth · Aug 11, 2017

Lord of Planar said:
Whoop-t-do...

Some of the crap they enforced that I heard about was stupid.

Probably, but for everyone you cite, there are probably others that should have been enforced. You start getting lenient, and companies will take advantage. The Bottom Line is the most enticing lure to shortcut environmental regulation. If you want an example, look at the hospitals in Europe, as they started disposing of their radioactive wastes through the mafia, who dumped it off the coast of the government-less Somalia.

Lord of Planar · Aug 12, 2017

Media_Truth said:
Probably, but for everyone you cite, there are probably others that should have been enforced. You start getting lenient, and companies will take advantage. The Bottom Line is the most enticing lure to shortcut environmental regulation.

The same could be said about the lack of traffic violations the police don't enforce.

Do you roll through stop signs?

Media_Truth said:
If you want an example, look at the hospitals in Europe, as they started disposing of their radioactive wastes through the mafia, who dumped it off the coast of the government-less Somalia.

Do you really want a government so intrusive, that it is impossible for anyone to commit any crime?

My God...

Just how much Big Brother do you want?

I would live to live in a crime free society. But at what costs to freedom? What you do is you crack down hard on those who commit such crimes. Remember the case where the Chinese executed an executive for some food product thing?

We are too soft on crime when people are caught. We need less enforcement and stiffer penalties when caught.

Media_Truth · Aug 12, 2017

Lord of Planar said:
The same could be said about the lack of traffic violations the police don't enforce.

Do you roll through stop signs?

Do you really want a government so intrusive, that it is impossible for anyone to commit any crime?

My God...

Just how much Big Brother do you want?

I would live to live in a crime free society. But at what costs to freedom? What you do is you crack down hard on those who commit such crimes. Remember the case where the Chinese executed an executive for some food product thing?

We are too soft on crime when people are caught. We need less enforcement and stiffer penalties when caught.

Your comment brings back visions of the '50s and '60s, when the barrels of toxic waste were being rolled down the hillside into the rivers. Corporate profits were way up though.

Renae · Aug 12, 2017

Media_Truth said:
Your comment brings back visions of the '50s and '60s, when the barrels of toxic waste were being rolled down the hillside into the rivers. Corporate profits were way up though.

You comments bring back visions of jack booted thugs dragging away anyone who didn't do it the gov't approved way.

chuckiechan · Aug 12, 2017

Media_Truth said:
This isn't surprising to me, with Scott Pruitt as EPA Director. Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project and former Director of Civil Enforcement at EPA, assessed the situation well, "President Trump campaigned on a promise of 'law and order,' but apparently law enforcement for big polluters is not what he had in mind..."

Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump : NPR

Since President Trump took office in January, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped dramatically, compared with past administrations. A study released by the Environmental Integrity Project finds that $12 million in civil penalties have been collected from violators in 26 cases between January and the end of July.

That's significantly less than the number of cases prosecuted and the penalties collected under the same six month period by the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. Under Barack Obama, the Justice Department prosecuted 34 cases, collecting $36 million in the time period. Under George W. Bush, 31 cases were lodged, bringing in $30 million in penalties. Under Bill Clinton, there were 45 cases filed, with penalties totaling $25 million.

So far, penalties collected by Trump's EPA are 60 percent lower than the average of the three previous administrations.

So does that mean I can finally install my birdbath?

Tanngrisnir · Aug 12, 2017

Renae said:
You comments bring back visions of jack booted thugs dragging away anyone who didn't do it the gov't approved way.

Your comments bring to mind those poor souls who cannot make a rational comparison no matter how simple a task it might be.

Media_Truth · Aug 12, 2017

I did a search of "Illegal Toxic Waste Dumping in the US". Pages of pages of recent occurences. And these are only the ones who got caught. Nobody eats fish from our major Midwestern streams. The practice continues, despite EPA regulations. Now, you have an Administration that going to turn a blind eye towards the issue. That's equivalent to cutting police officer staff, in areas that have extreme gang violence. What's going to happen when you do that?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/05/28/wal-mart-waste/2366999/

Wal-Mart Stores settled a decade-long investigation into its hazardous waste practices Tuesday when it pleaded guilty to criminal charges and agreed to pay $81 million, the Environmental Protection Agency said.
...
Wal-Mart did not have a program in place and failed to train its employees on proper hazardous waste management and disposal practices at the store level, according to documents filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.

https://thinkprogress.org/telecom-c...egally-dumping-electronic-waste-ec90b44ce19e/

AT&T; has agreed to pay nearly $52 million for illegally dumping hazardous electronic waste, in a settlement that represents the first legal action taken in California against a telecommunication company’s e-waste dumping.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/04/16/us-fracking-boom-creating-crisis-illegal-toxic-dumping
Industrial waste from fracking sites is leaving a "legacy of radioactivity" across the country as the drilling boom churns out more and more toxic byproducts with little to no oversight of the disposal process, critics warn.

According to a new report in Bloomberg Wednesday, the controversial oil and gas drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing is "spinning off thousands of tons of low-level radioactive trash," which has spawned a "surge" in illegal dumping at hundreds of sites in the U.S.

America'''s 28 Most Polluted Places
As the EPA and BP fight over the Gulf oil spill cleanup, the Daily Beast crunches the numbers and ranks the most contaminated sites in the nation.

The BP oil rig explosion has led to untold millions in lost income for people who make their living from the Gulf, but toxic hazards are an everyday occurrence: The EPA estimates that there are 3,500 chemical spills each year, requiring $260 million to clean.

The list goes on and on....

LowDown · Aug 12, 2017

Media_Truth said:
This isn't surprising to me, with Scott Pruitt as EPA Director. Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project and former Director of Civil Enforcement at EPA, assessed the situation well, "President Trump campaigned on a promise of 'law and order,' but apparently law enforcement for big polluters is not what he had in mind..."

Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump : NPR

Since President Trump took office in January, enforcement of environmental laws has dropped dramatically, compared with past administrations. A study released by the Environmental Integrity Project finds that $12 million in civil penalties have been collected from violators in 26 cases between January and the end of July.

That's significantly less than the number of cases prosecuted and the penalties collected under the same six month period by the Obama, Bush and Clinton administrations. Under Barack Obama, the Justice Department prosecuted 34 cases, collecting $36 million in the time period. Under George W. Bush, 31 cases were lodged, bringing in $30 million in penalties. Under Bill Clinton, there were 45 cases filed, with penalties totaling $25 million.

So far, penalties collected by Trump's EPA are 60 percent lower than the average of the three previous administrations.

Because the EPA is no longer trying to destroy jobs and industry, and that's a very good thing.

Media_Truth · Aug 13, 2017

LowDown said:
Because the EPA is no longer trying to destroy jobs and industry, and that's a very good thing.

I don't see jobs and industry suffering. No, it's not a good thing, unless your deranged.

Lord of Planar · Aug 13, 2017

Media_Truth said:
I did a search of "Illegal Toxic Waste Dumping in the US". Pages of pages of recent occurences. And these are only the ones who got caught. Nobody eats fish from our major Midwestern streams. The practice continues, despite EPA regulations. Now, you have an Administration that going to turn a blind eye towards the issue. That's equivalent to cutting police officer staff, in areas that have extreme gang violence. What's going to happen when you do that?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/05/28/wal-mart-waste/2366999/

Wal-Mart Stores settled a decade-long investigation into its hazardous waste practices Tuesday when it pleaded guilty to criminal charges and agreed to pay $81 million, the Environmental Protection Agency said.
...
Wal-Mart did not have a program in place and failed to train its employees on proper hazardous waste management and disposal practices at the store level, according to documents filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.

https://thinkprogress.org/telecom-c...egally-dumping-electronic-waste-ec90b44ce19e/

AT&T; has agreed to pay nearly $52 million for illegally dumping hazardous electronic waste, in a settlement that represents the first legal action taken in California against a telecommunication company’s e-waste dumping.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/04/16/us-fracking-boom-creating-crisis-illegal-toxic-dumping
Industrial waste from fracking sites is leaving a "legacy of radioactivity" across the country as the drilling boom churns out more and more toxic byproducts with little to no oversight of the disposal process, critics warn.

According to a new report in Bloomberg Wednesday, the controversial oil and gas drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing is "spinning off thousands of tons of low-level radioactive trash," which has spawned a "surge" in illegal dumping at hundreds of sites in the U.S.

America'''s 28 Most Polluted Places
As the EPA and BP fight over the Gulf oil spill cleanup, the Daily Beast crunches the numbers and ranks the most contaminated sites in the nation.

The BP oil rig explosion has led to untold millions in lost income for people who make their living from the Gulf, but toxic hazards are an everyday occurrence: The EPA estimates that there are 3,500 chemical spills each year, requiring $260 million to clean.

The list goes on and on....

What's your point?

Regulations were in place, regulations were violated, and the offenders were caught.

Media_Truth · Aug 13, 2017

Lord of Planar said:
What's your point?

Regulations were in place, regulations were violated, and the offenders were caught.

I'll put the same answer out there, that I inputted on your previous abrasive post.

Probably, but for everyone you cite, there are probably others that should have been enforced. You start getting lenient, and companies will take advantage. The Bottom Line is the most enticing lure to shortcut environmental regulation. If you want an example, look at the hospitals in Europe, as they started disposing of their radioactive wastes through the mafia, who dumped it off the coast of the government-less Somalia.

Lord of Planar · Aug 13, 2017

Media_Truth said:
I'll put the same answer out there, that I inputted on your previous abrasive post.

Probably, but for everyone you cite, there are probably others that should have been enforced. You start getting lenient, and companies will take advantage. The Bottom Line is the most enticing lure to shortcut environmental regulation. If you want an example, look at the hospitals in Europe, as they started disposing of their radioactive wastes through the mafia, who dumped it off the coast of the government-less Somalia.

How about we stop being lenient, and just stop imposing the silly wetspace violation on private citizens. Watch the corporations and raise the penalties so high they will nover attempt to circumvent the rules. Leave the common person alone for the most part.

You know, penalties in so many areas of regulation are too small to be anything but a slap on the wrist, and it is cheaper for some regulations to be violated than staying within them. I see nothing wrong with reducing the funding to many parts of the government. It needs to learn to work smarter, and with finesse.

Media_Truth · Aug 13, 2017

Lord of Planar said:
How about we stop being lenient, and just stop imposing the silly wetspace violation on private citizens. Watch the corporations and raise the penalties so high they will nover attempt to circumvent the rules. Leave the common person alone for the most part.

You know, penalties in so many areas of regulation are too small to be anything but a slap on the wrist, and it is cheaper for some regulations to be violated than staying within them. I see nothing wrong with reducing the funding to many parts of the government. It needs to learn to work smarter, and with finesse.

"Wetspace Violation on private citizens". Can you please provide some evidence, that citizens are being overly burdened by these EPA policies? You act as though the EPA is so overstaffed, that they have people watching every creek and stream. The laws are there, because they are in the best interest of the public, and they make people aware that certain actions are illegal. It still isn't going to stop everybody. Example: Dumping of oil based paints, draining the oil from a car, throwing trash along roadsides, flipping a cigarette out a car window, throwing fluorescent lamps in the trash, lithium batteries, etc, etc. After flooding in just about any area of the US, citizens are advised to drink bottled water. That's because all this illegal dumping, accumulated for years and years, gets leached into the waterways. In the case of citizens, it's more about education, than it is prosecution. If you think otherwise, provide your backup.

Lord of Planar · Aug 13, 2017

Media_Truth said:
"Wetspace Violation on private citizens". Can you please provide some evidence, that citizens are being overly burdened by these EPA policies?

Oh please. It should never happen like it has on occasion. The few instances are way too many.

Media_Truth said:
You act as though the EPA is so overstaffed, that they have people watching every creek and stream. The laws are there, because they are in the best interest of the public, and they make people aware that certain actions are illegal.

Not at all. Laws and regulations are often twisted from their intent. Personal agendas take over, to the harm of people doing no harm.

Media_Truth said:
It still isn't going to stop everybody. Example: Dumping of oil based paints, draining the oil from a car, throwing trash along roadsides, flipping a cigarette out a car window, throwing fluorescent lamps in the trash, lithium batteries, etc, etc.

Exactly. So why must we have so much bureaucracy?

Media_Truth said:
After flooding in just about any area of the US, citizens are advised to drink bottled water. That's because all this illegal dumping, accumulated for years and years, gets leached into the waterways. In the case of citizens, it's more about education, than it is prosecution. If you think otherwise, provide your backup.

There would be the same advisories with none of that, as water has new entered areas never flushed, and the normal course of streams, rivers, etc. are constantly renewed fresh otherwise.

Media_Truth · Aug 13, 2017

You didn't even respond to the my overall assessment of the EPA's importance to citizens, which was this statement:

In the case of citizens, it's more about education, than it is prosecution. If you think otherwise, provide your backup.

And for the umpteenth time, you provided no backup.

Lord of Planar · Aug 13, 2017

Media_Truth said:
You didn't even respond to the my overall assessment of the EPA's importance to citizens, which was this statement:

In the case of citizens, it's more about education, than it is prosecution. If you think otherwise, provide your backup.

And for the umpteenth time, you provided no backup.

I'm not going to hunt for the several stories out there over the years.

Point is, they should have never happened. But then, it appears you like an over aggressive authoritarian government, so you cant even sympathize with my point.

Media_Truth · Aug 13, 2017

Lord of Planar said:
I'm not going to hunt for the several stories out there over the years.

Point is, they should have never happened. But then, it appears you like an over aggressive authoritarian government, so you cant even sympathize with my point.

I thought not... You won't because there aren't that many. The EPA doesn't have the manpower to pursue private citizens. The IRS pursues individual citizens, and even that is rare. EPA 17,000 employees. IRS 93,000 employees.

Environmental Penalties Down Under President Trump

Curmudgeon