Posted on 10/31/2014 4:49:10 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
A Wyoming man named Andy Johnson got all the required state permits when he built a stock pond on his land a couple years ago. But now the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is threatening Johnson with fines of up to $75,000 per day, claiming that the two-foot wide, six-inch deep stream he used is subject to federal control.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
There is no other word for this — tyranny.
He should invite Kaci Hickox over to swim in it. Then he’d be fine.
Please, somebody, stop the madness.
I’d simply reply in a very courteous letter. I have heard your protest. I have since dropped my pants around my knees and bent over assuming the position. You can now position yourself behind me and commence to kissing my a@@
Democrats are evil.
2 ft wide and 6 in. deep pond.
We call that a ditch where I come from.
Those Green Nazis are some mean SOBs.
The arrogance of this government is stunning.
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
More on the way folks. The EPA is going after “ponds” on private land because of how some are allegedly stream feed and related issues.
Joseph Stalin is kicking himself in Hell for not setting up an EPA.
Is that all these damned senators know how to do...to write letters?
At some point, you simply say, “Kiss my ass.”
Run a pipe underground where they can’t see it and fill in the ditch....solved
“Please, somebody, stop the madness.”
The madness stops after you stick guns in the faces of these EPA Nazis and tell them to get lost or die.
It’s not rocket science. Start getting used to the idea of confronting fat 400-lb Nazis and commies who live in your neighborhoods.
The river flows into some state. Or so is the federal claim.
Since when the heck is the EPA interested in fish ponds?
…….
Do y'all remember discussions in this message board concerning how socialists are trying to unconstitutionally expand the federal government's powers using the federal government's power to negotiate treaties? Current related issues concern Constitution-ignoring USA politicians working through the UN to try to force US citizens to comply with foreign laws. Examples of such laws are gun control, parenting control and Agenda 21 issues, issues which the states have never delegated to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific power to address.
Thanks to information I recently got from freeper Ben Fiklin in a related thread, I had done some scratching and discovered the following. In the early 20th century, and with the help of activist justices, Congress had evidently used its power to negotiate treaties to usurp 10th Amendment-protected state power regulate water rights imo.
More specifically, although I'm happy that Native Americans were insured a supply of water for agricultural purposes as evidenced by the Supreme Court's decision in Winters v. United States, activist justices had given Congress the green light to regulate intrastate water rights, such federal legislative powers wrongly interpolated from Congress's power to negotiate treaties imo.
More specifically, activist justices had argued that the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, Section 2 of Article VII, in conjunction with Congress's power to negotiate treaties, trumped 10th Amendment-protected states power to regulate water. In fact, the justice who had argued that treaties trump the 10th Amendment, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., is one of main justices credited for fostering the idea of the "living Constitution."
However, regarding such a perspective on the scope of Congress's power to negotiate treaties, and as similarly noted with respect to controversial United Nations issues, please consider the following.
Thomas Jefferson, based on his experience as Vice President and President of the Senate, had officially clarified that Congress cannot use its power to negotiate treaties as a back door to establish new powers for itself, powers not based on the limited powers which the states have delegated to Congress via the Constitution.
“In giving to the President and Senate a power to make treaties, the Constitution meant only to authorize them to carry into effect, by way of treaty, any powers they might constitutionally exercise.” —Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.
“Surely the President and Senate cannot do by treaty what the whole government is interdicted from doing in any way.” — Thomas Jefferson: Parliamentary Manual, 1812 .
Also note that the Supreme Court had later reflected on Jefferson’s words, clarifying that Congress cannot use it’s power to negotiate treaties as a backdoor way to expand its constitutionally-limited powers.
"2. Insofar as Art. 2(11) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice provides for the military trial of civilian dependents accompanying the armed forces in foreign countries, it cannot be sustained as legislation which is "necessary and proper" to carry out obligations of the United States under international agreements made with those countries, since no agreement with a foreign nation can confer on Congress or any other branch of the Government power which is free from the restraints of the Constitution [emphasis added] [emphasis added].” — Reid v. Covert, 1956.
So while patriots have recently been concerned about "closing the barn door so the horses can't escape," stopping corrupt Congress from using its power to negotiate treaties to limit constitutional rights with the help of the UN, little did we know that one horse had already escaped from the barn in the early 20th century with respect to 10th Amendment-protected water rights, compliments of activist justices.
Also regarding the EPA, note that the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected government bureaucrats like those running the EPA. So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative / regulatory powers whether it wants it or not imo. And by delegating regulatory powers to non-elected bureaucrats, Congress is wrongly protecting legislative powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of Section 1-3 mentioned above.
So not only has Congress wrongly delegated legislative powers to non-elected bureaucrats in blatant defiance of the previously mentioned clauses, but Congress has delegated powers that the states have never granted to Congress via the Constitution, the power to regulate water rights in this example.
Bravo!
Bookmarked.
Gonna be some EPA, and other “government representatives” ending up in shallow graves if this keeps up. Someone is going to snap and then the fireworks will begin.
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.