Bill to elimanate the EPA

[ratled]

Just passing it on
H.R.861 - To terminate the Environmental Protection Agency.


ratled

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/861

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[rodoconnor]

Federal employees are not susceptible to bribery and corruption In this country ? On this planet? A Federal presence is required?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Peyton Manning]

wonder if the people in bopal india would have liked regulation of some sort

 

[mytimetoshine]

One needs to understand the nature of the beast that we're dealing with here. When it was first formed the EPA was a good idea. Within a few year of its start, one no suspected they could drive right over the San Bernadino Valley as you started down Cajon Pass because the smog was so thick. This was a good thing. No more burning eyes for weeks at a time, no more rivers catching fire, etc etc etc etc.

However..... It didn't take long for certain people to realize that they could use this agency to further their own agendas. Soon they infiltrated the agency and worked their way into positions that could change policies. The majority of these changes seemed good at first but they kept making more and more changes here and there and before we all knew it, they were attempting to control EVERYTHING. Needless to say, by the time we all caught on, the EPA was exceeding their mandate left and right.

Do we really need the EPA? I feel that we do BUT not in its current excessive form. I don't want to go back to the days before they came into being but at the same time their current heavy handedness needs to be cut back to the level of their original mandate. These people are supposed to be working for all of us, not a certain few.

Well said.

Clearing house and revamping would normally be choice for the EPA. but with the current state of politics I would have it eliminated. The left stopped listening to and trying to work with the right a long time ago. Even though the right has the Congress, Senate and the white house they are not only unwilling to work with them, even worse they refuse to except the outcome and seem like they want to fight till death over it. For this reason I say it needs to be eliminated and a new smaller less powerful agency in its place.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[mike(swWash)]

Is there intelligent life out there in control? I think not.
What's the old saying Something like "Absolute power will corrupt.....absolutely"

 

[Goldfleks]

I'm ok with additional pollution, but I think it needs to come from Small Business and keep the regulations on Big Business. Wall Street Businesses don't care about where they pollute, they just care about the bottom line. Small businesses owners still have to live and breath where they pollute.

I worked in hospitality design, and in CA, you can't use oil based stains and sealers on wood and furniture. I would be totally fine allowing smaller woodworking businesses to use the oil based finishes and tolerate the off-gassing that happens when they dry. They cure faster and eliminate the need for huge storage areas just to allow for drying. It would also allow for smaller businesses to compete for "last minute were behind schedule" type of jobs. That bigger wood finishing companies would not be able to complete due to having to use water based finishes that need extended times to dry. It would also allow the smaller companies to not have to carry huge overhead drying warehouses, which would drive their costs down and give them a competitive edge against the larger commercial manufacturing companies.

My thing is I'm all fine and dandy for reduced regulation, but I want the regulation to help small businesses, not Wallstreet. Income inequality is a big enough issue even with regulation. De-Regulate the little guy.

 

[burtonridr]

So local authorities are too susceptible to bribery and corruption. A Federal presence is required. If you don't think the EPA is required, then consider fishing on the Shenandoah River in Virginia. I had no idea about the PCB pollution and was catching and releasing fish. Heck I even gave a huge catfish to some Mexicans so they could grill it for lunch. (I feel bad about that...) Later in the day, a game warden comes up in a Kayak and gives me a info card on why you can't eat certain fish. Here is the info...

http://www.vdh.virginia.gov/content/uploads/sites/12/2016/01/ShenandoahRiver1.pdf

So I'm in this beautiful spot, enjoying nature, catching fish, and not realizing that a decades ago a manufacturing plant was dumping waste into the river and has made certain fish toxic, to this day...

This issue is a real concern for me, some rivers and lakes have PCB, some have lead, pesticide run off, or mercury. As a person who enjoys fishing and also tries to live off what I catch or shoot, this creates a real problem for me. A lot of the rivers and streams around here are polluted with mercury from past mining operations. The silt containing the heavy metals are still working their way through the ecosystem, it sucks having to worry about contaminating your body because you ate a fish from a stream, that from all appearances looks crystal clean.


Did the EPA prevent this? Could they have? Maybe…. Would we even have the hind sight today to know that this would happen before doing it, if it hadnt been done? Probably not. Having a federal agency doesn’t change that fact. People are aware and made changes because it already happened, not because the gov created an agency. The locals here have more at stake than a federal agency, locals feel the consequences of what happened and are going to be up in arms today because of it. Locals require support and resources to defend, protect and provide opportunity in their communities.

 

[Capt Nemo]

What needs to be done is to remove regulatory authority from them, and they must get all new regs passed by congress in order to implement. That would put a hell of a brake on these boys.

 

[Bejay]

The EPA is simply an agency the Fed Gov assigned the task of enacting the Laws (Acts) already on the books. https://www.ametsoc.org/sloan/cleanair/cleanairlegisl.html. Doing away with the EPA does not mean we threw the baby out with the wash water. More explicitly it means we saved the baby and got rid of the foul dirty baby bath water. A new era of Lawful authority is required. The EPA became an abusive authoritative unlawful agency.....I say good riddance!

Bejay

 

[Mad Machinist]

I say eliminate the EPA and let the States handle it. If anyone thinks the States are going to pass on pollution fines as a source of revenue, then your out of your mind. Then maybe actual clean ups will happen.

 

[Bejay]

I say eliminate the EPA and let the States handle it. If anyone thinks the States are going to pass on pollution fines as a source of revenue, then your out of your mind. Then maybe actual clean ups will happen.

One might consider that letting Calif and Oregon handle the Federal Acts might be like asking the Coyote to watch the Chicken coup. I am not a believer in States obeying federal laws....and I believe the miners and legalized marijuana growers/sellers might offer some insight as to how States want to be the authority! I am all for clean and clean ups but I have no faith in the Oregon or Calif legislative bodies!

Bejay

Bejay

 

[Mad Machinist]

One might consider that letting Calif and Oregon handle the Federal Acts might be like asking the Coyote to watch the Chicken coup. I am not a believer in States obeying federal laws....and I believe the miners and legalized marijuana growers/sellers might offer some insight as to how States want to be the authority! I am all for clean and clean ups but I have no faith in the Oregon or Calif legislative bodies!

Bejay

Bejay

So everyone else has to suffer because of a few states? I understand where you are coming from but this is no different than now. California trying to dictate how everyone else HAS to live, not wants to live.

 

[Bejay]

Give thought to this MM. I believe the point can be will taken that each State can be politically motivated. Utah has never had a Dem legislative body or Governor so the Liberal anti politics might not come into play. But State Legislative bodies change often and the "politics" of utilizing natural resources within any State can be a ya or nay attitude. Federal Laws are more applicable to the management of Federally Controlled lands. Relinquishing those lands to the States may be unwise. I would rather rely on Federal Courts and let States challenge disagreements via that venue. Politics plays a huge role in such resource issues and Laws like the Clean Air Act or Clean Water Act....or even the ESA. The States have a much diverse opportunity as the word UNITED implies to insure that the nations public gets equal protection under the Federal Laws.

Bejay

 

[enamel7]

When eating fish with mercury, just eat more fish. You'll be fine!

 

[Bejay]

Worldwide studies of human fish consumption have shown that populations who's diet is primarily fish suffer no ill effects from mercury. Actually it proved the contrary; unless a diet were to be of the upper food chain fish species. The fish consumption scare per mercury issues was a big scare that ended up being just that...a big scare. There are about 10 fish species that were identified to be avoided as a primary diet resource. The worldwide study actually proved that populations that avoided fish due to the mercury scare ended up having deficiencies in a substance necessary for baby development...and those populations with the deficiency had developmental learning problems for young children. I would imagine I could find the study and offer it for reference if desired.

It is a very interesting worldwide scientific study...and of course it never made the mainstream news....although it should have IMHO. It is easy to project a fear based on a potential health risk and is often done when scientists propose a hypothesis leading to FUNDED studies....but sometimes the hypothesis proves contrary to the peer reviewed facts.

The relevance to this discussion being on a mining forum is based on the anti dredging issues in Calif that based their premise that "DREDGING CAUSED MERCURY ISSUES" that adversely affected humans and fish.


Bejay

 

[russau]

ARE THEY GONE YET I cant hold my breath much longer!!! PUFF PUFF BOY I NEED A COUPLE OF THESE!!

 

[russau]

Are they gone yet??

 

[russau]

Well to me , it don't look like the epa is going away! Prez Trump appointed a man for the job of epa boss! OR maybe hes the guy put in there to head up the closeing of the epa I feel that the epa WAS a good thing on its inception BUT these guys got in and dug in to make themselves a empire and their own little kingdom. Time to cut them back to the beginning or out with the bath water! Time will tell!

 

[ratled]

This is just me but there needs to be some and reasonable regulations in place. We the miners aren't a problem at any level. The states own study show there isn't an problem with merc and fish in any water way.

The EPA is kind of like an old broke building, at some point rather than fix all of the problems it is easier to just doze the old building down and build a new one......................

ratled

 

[rodoconnor]

Hopefully Russ ,he's presiding over the wake ! Or at least a dramatic curtailment.

 

[IMPDLN]

So many problems in this world today with no acknowledged solutions. I say that's a bunch of manure. We have the capability as humans to fix most of this worlds problems, however the solutions don't make some entity filthy rich or fit some other entities agenda. That's the bottom line, money and agendas. What ever happened to we the people for the people. Love thy neighbor, or even do unto others. Too much greed is what happened and there is no simple solution or overnight fix for the current state of affairs.

I myself don't care for the current EPA. They like many things are out of control. I myself believe our government and current EPA type organizations are just telling us all a bunch of lies. Do you really think global warming exists? I don't. I believe we are on a rock that spins around in space at about 17,000 miles an hour and this rock we live on will change as it will no matter what we do. Climate shift is certainly going on, however I don't believe humans have much if any effect on what this rock/planet does.

I also don't like seeing trash or visible pollution nor do I want to be poisoned by the environment around me any more than any of you do. I was born in the 60's in California and moved to Arizona at 3 years old because my older sister had asthma so bad the L.A. smog at the time was killing her. We went back to visit relatives during vacations and such like Disney Land and Knott's Berry Farm. I was a teenager before I ever saw the San Bernardino mountains because the pollution was so bad. You could not even see half a city block back in those days.

However I have to question how much better is the pollution really? Certainly you can see farther and the sky isn't grey all the time, but is the air we breath really as clean as it appears? Many rivers in the USA had such bad pollution back in those days that not even crawdads survived in them. Most have been cleaned up to what seems like acceptable levels. Fish and other life exists again in those rivers. However how clean is our water really?

I am a fly fisherman and a gold prospector. At one time I got involved in an environmental organization thinking I was going to help. I found out the hard way that what they thought was helping only ended up destroying a natural wild situation. Their idea was to use a backhoe and poison to control how they thought a fishery should be protected. That was about 25 years ago and that fishery still hasn't recovered from what was supposed to save it. All I know now is man sure knows how to f*** stuff up real good. Spotted Owl is another environmental fiasco that is still affecting our forests and has only put people out of work and screwed up our forests worse than they ever were before. There is no end in sight for this kind of foolishness.

I'm going back to air pollution now.....clean air, fact or fiction. Is that air clean just because it appears to be clearer? I say no. Why you might ask? Have you ever read the warning labels on the gas pumps we all use every day? Ever heard of MTBE? This chemical our government uses as an oxygenator in our fuel is about the nastiest chemical man has ever developed. It is a huge cancer causer and goes into your fuel tank and back out the tailpipe as a vapor. Systematically poisoning every one of us slowly. It takes very little of this chemical to poison a large body of water and there is no known way to get rid of it. No filters or water treatment known to get rid of it once it gets into water. Yet our government insists it is used as part of our federal emissions standards as a fuel additive. This is just one example, and a very nasty one to boot. DEF fluid is now required to be added to all diesels. This is just another chemical that is being delivered to our air for the sake of emissions. Now I ask you, have they really cleaned the air or have they just found a way to make pollution invisible.

Are electric cars really environmentally sound, or even the California favorite Toyota Prius? I think not. If an electric car had solar panels it might be greener, but it certainly isn't when it has to be plugged into a wall socket and get it's power off the grid like everything else. Lithium batteries certainly are used in all of them and being mined in a 3rd world country that could care less about the environment certainly aren't helping them be "green" . Not to mention the disposal of said lithium cells when they go bad. All the plastics are still made from petroleum products as well with more plastics being used all the time.

We could be running solar electric vehicles, diesel electrics that get well over 100 mpg or even hydrogen vehicles. We have the technology, however there is no profit in making dependable, truly efficient and greener vehicles. And how many vehicles are on the road today compared to say 1970?

How about that electricity we use today? Hydroelectric and coal burning are today obsolete. Still necessary to some extent but the grids could be updated with solar and hydrogen methods that would be more efficient and greener. They say solar is too expensive. What they really are saying is there is no profit in solar. Nobody makes long term profit from energy that is self sufficient and basically free from maintenance. If they really wanted to be green they would advance solar technology like computer cpu's and figure out a nanometer process to produce highly efficient solar cells. Then you would only have to install them on the existing rooftops all over the country, especially anyplace in the southwest, and truly green power could be had for most of the world. Granted you would need some other power source when storms are around, but that is where hydrogen comes into play.

I'm sorry, this has been a long rant. But we the people need to quit being sheeple. We are all being manipulated and have been for a long time. This world will continue getting worse before it ever gets better. We as people need to modify how we live and how we treat other people and our environment. Until people as a whole unit start giving a crap about anything other than themselves, especially the people with money and power, we are all doomed to be flushed like a tird down the toilet.

I could go on and on about this, but it won't help. Our government will continue to lie and do what suits them, not we the people. Until people somehow stop being greedy and actually go back to caring about others, we will continue on our down stream spiral. This is really the longest and slowest toilet flush of our lives, living in the current state of affairs. Dennis