• 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!

Frontline: War on the EPA

calamity

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
calamity said:
Below is a worthwhile video, for anyone who cares about the Trumpian aim to destroy our environment so a few insiders can get a little richer.

War on the EPA | Watch S35 E16 | FRONTLINE | PBS
Click to expand...

Wow, what stuck out in mind were comments by two of the EPA officials:

"It's a clear and present danger to the public health and safety".

and

"It's a hostile takeover. The message is that scientists, lawyers and engineers are no longer valued. This is now a political operation."
 
Media_Truth said:
Wow, what stuck out in mind were comments by two of the EPA officials:

"It's a clear and present danger to the public health and safety".

and

"It's a hostile takeover. The message is that scientists, lawyers and engineers are no longer valued. This is now a political operation."
Click to expand...

Yep. The second quote really holds immediate weight too. We see it clearly happening in real time. The first will take a few years to manifest. But, I suspect it is true.
 
I watched this.

The EPA's ideologically driven agenda and over reach from the previous administration isn't covered enough, if you ask me.
Quite a few court decisions have turned back quite a few of their over reaching regulations.

Interesting to note that the two quotes posted were from EPA bureaucrats who's powers and over reach agenda are getting trimmed back.
Of course they'd rather retain their power.
Of course they'd use such dire terms at the curtailment of their power.
 
eohrnberger said:
I watched this.

The EPA's ideologically driven agenda and over reach from the previous administration isn't covered enough, if you ask me.
Quite a few court decisions have turned back quite a few of their over reaching regulations.

Interesting to note that the two quotes posted were from EPA bureaucrats who's powers and over reach agenda are getting trimmed back.
Of course they'd rather retain their power.
Of course they'd use such dire terms at the curtailment of their power.
Click to expand...

You are aware that Trump appointed sworn enemies of the EPA to run it. Correct?
 
calamity said:
You are aware that Trump appointed sworn enemies of the EPA to run it. Correct?
Click to expand...

Pruitt, yes, yes. From what the program showed, and additional information, I still come to the conclusion that the EPA went way overboard, and was, and still is, in need of being trimmed back to a more reasonable and measured position in their regulations.
 
calamity said:
Below is a worthwhile video, for anyone who cares about the Trumpian aim to destroy our environment so a few insiders can get a little richer.

War on the EPA | Watch S35 E16 | FRONTLINE | PBS
Click to expand...

Well, for those who arent troubled by “scope creep”, you should expect some “scope retreat”.

They are a bureaucracy not Congress. The have gone from regulating pesticides to regulating my bird bath.
 
I am genuinely worried about the current trend of dismissing the opinions of scientists and engineers in favor of businessmen and politicians. In a perfect world the people that think this way would have to get their water from the river that chemicals are leaked into, or breath the polluted air, but unfortunately it will fall on those with the least amount of resources to do anything about it.
 
MrPeanut said:
I am genuinely worried about the current trend of dismissing the opinions of scientists and engineers in favor of businessmen and politicians. In a perfect world the people that think this way would have to get their water from the river that chemicals are leaked into, or breath the polluted air, but unfortunately it will fall on those with the least amount of resources to do anything about it.
Click to expand...

Real pollution vs. Carbon dioxide.
 
MrPeanut said:
What does that even mean? This is about much more than CO2.
Click to expand...

I think the EPA is over-reaching on a lot of stuff besides "Climate Change" but we can probably live with that.
But the insanity that is "Climate Change" and the notion that CO2 needs to be regulated we can't live with.
Taken to its logical conclusion the regulation of CO2 will do immense damage to the the human condition.
 
eohrnberger said:
Pruitt, yes, yes. From what the program showed, and additional information, I still come to the conclusion that the EPA went way overboard, and was, and still is, in need of being trimmed back to a more reasonable and measured position in their regulations.
Click to expand...

I'm responding to this post, because it looks like the thread is about to be turned into a Climate Change denial thread. This EPA address by the POTUS goes way beyond some "trimming" of the EPA. What did he do, fly a bunch of coal miners into DC for the event? This would be akin to a Democratic president bringing in a bunch of widows and widowers from the Vegas slaughter, and parading them in Washington, appealing for more gun control. The methods being employed by this POTUS are unprecedented. Just remember - what goes around, comes around.
 
Media_Truth said:
I'm responding to this post, because it looks like the thread is about to be turned into a Climate Change denial thread. This EPA address by the POTUS goes way beyond some "trimming" of the EPA. What did he do, fly a bunch of coal miners into DC for the event? This would be akin to a Democratic president bringing in a bunch of widows and widowers from the Vegas slaughter, and parading them in Washington, appealing for more gun control. The methods being employed by this POTUS are unprecedented. Just remember - what goes around, comes around.
Click to expand...

This post does not respond to the point of my post which was that the EPA had overstepped and overreached in their regulations, and that these regulations need / needed to be trimmed back.

That being said, yes, the level of theater in the political arena has escalated, to the detriment of good public policy. Most unfortunate.

You speak of POTUS methods? I'd be careful if I were you, as the previous administration has a long list of seriously questionable actions they have taken. Might not want too close an examination of those, might end up on the losing end of that.
 
calamity said:
You are aware that Trump appointed sworn enemies of the EPA to run it. Correct?
Click to expand...

Yup and many are so glad to see that the EPA is being returned to it's core responsibilities and not worrying
about a puddle on private property. It was just great when President Trump invited the coal miners to the EPA to watch him sign an EO
reversing Obama rules.

ap-trump-epa-er-170328_16x9_992.jpg
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Yup and many are so glad to see that the EPA is being returned to it's core responsibilities and not worrying
about a puddle on private property. It was just great when President Trump invited the coal miners to the EPA to watch him sign an EO
reversing Obama rules.

View attachment 67223961
Click to expand...

Yeah, because coal is just soo great. :roll:
 
Jetboogieman said:
Companies spend a lot of money to make sure people like you come to this conclusion.
Click to expand...

A lot of ecomentalists spend a lot of money making sure you think that this isn't the case.

When the EPA regulations punitively punished a farmer for managing a pond which his property was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

It was clear at that point that the EPA had become an instrument of bludgeoning of anyone that didn't agree with the seriously over zealous ecomentalists and their agenda. Protecting the environment was just an excuse, a vehicle to implement and enforce ideology and punish those that didn't agree.
 
eohrnberger said:
A lot of ecomentalists spend a lot of money making sure you think that this isn't the case.

When the EPA regulations punitively punished a farmer for managing a pond which his property was the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

It was clear at that point that the EPA had become an instrument of bludgeoning of anyone that didn't agree with the seriously over zealous ecomentalists and their agenda. Protecting the environment was just an excuse, a vehicle to implement and enforce ideology and punish those that didn't agree.
Click to expand...

God getting someone to this world view is money well spent.
 
Jetboogieman said:
God getting someone to this world view is money well spent.
Click to expand...

God?

Kinda drew my own conclusion from what reading I had cone on the matter. Not sure if God (or anyone else) had anything to do with it.
 
Jetboogieman said:
God getting someone to this world view is money well spent.
Click to expand...

It's not a free country unless I can store sludge on my property and drain any pond I want, even if a rare wood duck uses it as a stopping point during migration. Freedumb is not having to give a damn.
 
calamity said:
It's not a free country unless I can store sludge on my property and drain any pond I want, even if a rare wood duck uses it as a stopping point during migration. Freedumb is not having to give a damn.
Click to expand...

Clearly, you really don't know the greater details of the issue.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is letting a Wyoming farmer keep the pond he constructed in a closely watched case on the federal government’s jurisdiction over waterways.
Andy Johnson had sued the EPA last year over about $16 million in fines that he had amassed for constructing a pond on his property without an EPA permit, in a creek that the agency said is subject to the Clean Water Act.

The Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative law firm that represented Johnson, applauded the settlement as a major victory for property rights, as did Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).The case comes amid conservative accusations that the EPA is trampling private property rights. The agency made final a regulation last year asserting federal power over small bodies of water, which opponents say gives it authority over nearly all land in the country.

EPA settles with Wyoming farmer over man-made pond | TheHill
Click to expand...

A man made pond that goes nowhere but on the farmers property and the EPA wants to punish the farmer. Smacks of ideologically driven to me.

"trampling private property rights"

One of the function of government is to ensure the rights of its citizens, not trample on them. This is but one example of many where the EPA's zealotry overreached, as deemed by multiple court decisions.

The departments of government should not be weaponized against their own citizenry.
 
eohrnberger said:
Clearly, you really don't know the greater details of the issue.



A man made pond that goes nowhere but on the farmers property and the EPA wants to punish the farmer. Smacks of ideologically driven to me.

"trampling private property rights"

One of the function of government is to ensure the rights of its citizens, not trample on them. This is but one example of many where the EPA's zealotry overreached, as deemed by multiple court decisions.

The departments of government should not be weaponized against their own citizenry.
Click to expand...

A man made pond, as in damning up a creek and starving the guys further downhill of water? Yeah, there just isn't any freedumb left in this country.
 
calamity said:
A man made pond, as in damning up a creek and starving the guys further downhill of water? Yeah, there just isn't any freedumb left in this country.
Click to expand...

Err. No. The EPA violated their own regulations attempting to fine the farmer.

In a case that drew national attention, the EPA ordered Andy Johnson in January 2014 to tear out the pond or pay $37,500 per day in fines for what the agency described as a violation of the Clean Water Act, even though stock ponds are exempt from the federal law and he had obtained the necessary state and local permits.
Wyoming rancher facing $20M in EPA fines claims victory, keeps cash, stock pond - Washington Times
Click to expand...

The farmer was compliant with the necessary state and local permits, and yet the EPA decided to punish him for some imagined violation, even thought their own regulations stated "that stock ponds are exempt from the federal law".

It's like WTF is that? EPA?

This is the kinda **** that happens when you have ideological zealots running (attempting to run) a federal bureaucracy.

Government departments should never be weaponized against their own law abiding citizenry, yet it seems this is exactly what you support. :crazy3:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom