Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House appropriators advance spending bill that would slash the EPA’s funding
Hotair ^ | 06/20/2012 | Erika Johnsen

Posted on 06/20/2012 5:15:44 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Ah, such a tease! I can’t say I have much faith that, the way things stand right now, this bill will make it through untouched, but it’s beautiful to think about nonetheless.

A House committee has managed to advance a 2013 spending bill that would impose deep cuts and restrictions on the Environmental Protection Agency.

The bill cuts EPA by $1.4 billion, about 17 percent, compared to current funding. The GOP points out that this brings the EPA below fiscal 1998 funding.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), who hails from coal country, said he is especially proud of the measure, which was advanced from subcommittee to the full spending panel on a voice vote.

“This represents the strong concerns of this Congress over the EPA’s unprecedented effort to drive certain industries to extinction with a cocktail of burdensome regulations, questionable guidance policies, and arbitrary enforcement measures — all designed to shut down the permitting process for energy exploration and production,” he said.

It contains a number of environmental riders, including one to prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases using New Source Performance Standards and one stopping EPA from expanding its ability to regulate “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act.

The bill contains several riders, including one that would stop the EPA from using the New Source Performance Standards to regulate greenhouse gases and another that would prevent them from expanding their authority to regulate “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act (case in point: That one was their excuse for crucifying — woops, I meant persecuting — an Idaho couple in the egregious case of Sackett v. EPA).

I’ve made no secret of my unadulterated disdain for the Environmental Protection Agency — while I think there can be such a thing as effective government environmental regulation, the EPA is a wildly intrusive, power-tripping, practically unbridled band of overzealous environmentalist crusaders who are often conveniently disallowed from considering the costs of their policies because they ostensibly have only the public’s best interest in mind. Their frivolous litigation, crippling sanctions, and uncertainty-inducing agenda are some of the more significant obstacles our economy faces.

I daren’t even consider the possibility that the EPA could someday be eliminated (le sigh…), but the thought of at least watching them take any kind of a hit that could rein in some of their wanton regulatory ways, instead of being allowed to metastasize even more, pleases me to no end. (Especially since, you know, we’ve been operating at above trillion-dollar deficits and a lot of stuff has just got to go.)

Politico and certain Democrats have labeled Republicans’ various efforts to put the brakes on some of the EPA’s forthcoming rules and regulations as an “attack”:

Oh, and there were at least 10 — count ‘em 10 — Capitol Hill hearings and markups on environmental matters Tuesday.

This week is just the latest round of a Republican attack that has forced the White House to hold back on new environmental regulations, lawmakers say — at least for now.

“They have slowed down some of that stuff, but it’s only until after the election,” Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said. “After that, it’s going to be scary.” …

“The unrelenting attacks by the Republicans on environmental protection, I think, have caused people in the administration to be careful to pick their fights,” said California Rep. Henry Waxman, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

You’re dang straight it’s an attack — I should hope that Republicans keep on engaging in a full-frontal assault on the out-of-control independent agency that manages to kill jobs and opportunities like its their sole purpose in life.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: budget; climatechange; climategate; climategate2; congress; epa; globalwarminghoax; spending

1 posted on 06/20/2012 5:15:55 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Long Overdue. EPA is one of the real reasons conservatives have to be upset with Nixon.

2 posted on 06/20/2012 5:28:20 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Defund it entirely!!!!!!!

3 posted on 06/20/2012 5:37:43 PM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

Defund it. Empty their buildings and sell them.

4 posted on 06/20/2012 5:48:48 PM PDT by Red_Devil 232 (VietVet - USMC All Ready On The Right? All Ready On The Left? All Ready On The Firing Line!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

17 % is a 1.4 billion dollars cut ???

Heck... cut it 50% this year and 10 % each year until it is the right size...

A office in every state manned by one person...

90 % of what they do can be done by the states anyway....

5 posted on 06/20/2012 5:54:05 PM PDT by Popman (When you elect a clown: expect a circus...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red_Devil 232
Defund it. Empty their buildings and sell them.

Drive them before us and hear the lamentation of their women.

6 posted on 06/20/2012 5:57:23 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

“Defund it. Empty their buildings and sell them.”

That should apply to the U.N., the EPA, the DOE, the DHS, and 100 other overreaching departments.

7 posted on 06/20/2012 6:14:36 PM PDT by Fireone (Patriots, not politicians! Impeach, convict, and sentence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; TigerLikesRooster; landsbaum; Signalman; NormsRevenge; steelyourfaith; ...


8 posted on 06/20/2012 6:15:00 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The Global Warming Hoax was a Criminal Act....where is Al Gore?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Interesting development indeed.

9 posted on 06/20/2012 7:07:59 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: To-Whose-Benefit?

Has there ever been a political analysis of why Nixon wanted an EPA?

10 posted on 06/21/2012 5:58:52 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

Dunno. It would be an interesting study if I ever find one. About the only site I find cynical enough to swallow a short blurb from when environmental stuff’s on the table would be these guys.

“Nixon created the EPA by executive order in 1970 as a sop to the anti-Vietanm war left — not because he thought an EPA was needed.

Nixon reassigned to the EPA the ongoing environmental protection activities of other federal agencies.

So Nixon’s move was little more than a cynical bureaucratic reshuffling done to facilitate his Vietnam policies — not some proud legacy of the Republican party.”

And unfortunately the source page they cite isn’t there anymore, but their contention that Nixon was just throwing a bone to the antiwar tree hugger crowd sounds plausible enough.

11 posted on 06/21/2012 6:34:25 PM PDT by To-Whose-Benefit? (It is Error alone which needs the support of Government. The Truth can stand by itself.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson