Economist finds EPA analysis of water rule flawed

American Farm Bureau Federation ^ | May 29, 2014

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Only the EPA would regulate a ditch as a "waterway".

[LegendHasIt]

"The EPA's proposed Clean Water Act rule is rife with errors, lacks transparency and would greatly expand strict federal control over land that was previously not regulated by the federal government...

That is the actual intent.

'It is a feature, not a bug.'

[GreyFriar]

Or my back yard, which will have a day or two of waterloggedness after 3 or 4 inches of rain.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

The EPA's proposed Clean Water Act rule is rife with errors, lacks transparency and would greatly expand strict federal control over land that was previously not regulated by the federal government, according to a report by economist and University of California-Berkley faculty member David Sunding, Ph.D. The proposed EPA rule represents an expansion of the “Waters of the United States” to include waters such as small, isolated wetlands, ephemeral drains and many ditches. In the proposed rule’s economic analysis, the EPA systematically underestimated the impact on affected communities and businesses, according to the report.

Let's start with a simple but oft times ignored fact. The EPA is unconstitutional!

[Louis Foxwell]

Precisely. The gov is all about taxing our use of rain, sunshine and air.

[Logical me]

The EPA should be defunded and if we get the Senate they should be disbanded. This bunch of idiots are insane and all from top to bottom should be unemployed. Some form of protection is needed but not so intrusive.

[GreyFriar]

And here in Maryland the state legislature instituted a “rain tax” on all property to pay for the “run off” caused by the house roof, drive way and any out buildings that prevent the water from soaking into the ground. The tax money us being used, supposedly, “to save the bay.”

[umgud]

EPA is king of the fourth branch of government.

[DJ MacWoW]

5% Of Free Republics Community Donates.
What Is There To Say To Those Who CAN Donate But Won't?
Nothing.
There Is No Graphic Or Plea That Will Make Those Posters Take Up The Slack.
So 5% Supports The Rest.
How Conservative Is A Free Ride?

[Pontiac]

Seconded

But we both know that the Republikrats don’t have the nads to do any such thing.

[5th MEB]

According to the EPA that puddle of piss I left in the desert the last time I went hunting is considered an ephemeral wetland.

[OneWingedShark]

Let's start with a simple but oft times ignored fact. The EPA is unconstitutional!

The EPA being disbanded for unconstitutionality stands about the same chance as stopping the War on Drugs or abolishing the ATF or the NSA and its domestic espionage.
And all for the same reason: those in power are disinclined to relinquish it.

[TalBlack]

“Or my back yard, which will have a day or two of waterloggedness after 3 or 4 inches of rain.”

Good thing you didn’t use a ‘sarc’ tag.

Mayor Bloomberg of NY once, after much effort, tracked down a large leak in on of NY’s water tunnels. When he tried to rectify the massive waste of water the EPA said ‘No, it’s a wetland now and subject to EPA rules. Bloomberg actually backed down rather than laugh in their faces and fix the damn leak! True story.

[Robert A Cook PE]

A famous legacy of an actual case in the upper SanFrancisco bay south of Napa, CA. Farmer had a set of dikes made in the late 1890’s ... The fields were dry, were productive for decades.

The dike broke, the area was flooded at high tide one night. Magically, they became “wetlands” and he could not fix the dike.

[Gen.Blather]

“The EPA is unconstitutional! “

I agree. However, you probably won’t see an effort to get rid of it on those grounds. So much of what has happened since the introduction of the Federal Reserve has been unconstitutional that if you took that as the criteria to eliminate government organization practically everything done in twentieth century wound be undone. While you might get a majority to say this or that is unconstitutional it opens up the entirety of the mess to a level of scrutiny that would bring every special interest in the world into play. Congress Critters would quickly trade votes to protect their sacred cows so that, in the end, not one would be slaughtered.

It’s probably best to attack the EPA for overstepping their bounds and becoming, in effect a fourth branch of government.

[bunkerhill7]

EPA hereby claims all New Jersey as wetlands.

[Rodamala]

On a railroad rehab project I am working on in NY State, the NY Department of Environmental Conservation has deemed this bridge a "permit required" work location as according to them, it spans a "Navigable Waterway":

There have been screaming matches between one of the project managers and the Environmental Science girl in the office who LOVES these sort of things as it is more hours for her to put against a lump sum job.

The problem is lack of balls to tell the DEC to go F themselves... as railroad maintenance is already regulated by the Federal Railroad Administration... and if a ditch is plugged it is a violation of 49 CFR §213... so you maintain the ditch because "Interstate Commerce is at Stake".

[USCG SimTech]

Only the EPA would regulate a ditch as a "waterway".

Then the EPA will need to hire an agent to watch over and file monthly reports on each and every puddle, ditch, soggy field. Billions of EPA agents standing over ditches, 24/7/365.

[USCG SimTech]

“Or my back yard, which will have a day or two of waterloggedness after 3 or 4 inches of rain.”

But the next step is the water table. All the land above any water that MIGHT be underground is now federally regulated. Water is water. Just because it lays underground 40 feet doesn't make it less than water.

[The_Republic_Of_Maine]

"The EPA being disbanded for unconstitutionality stands about the same chance as stopping the War on Drugs or abolishing the ATF or the NSA and its domestic espionage. And all for the same reason: those in power are disinclined to relinquish it. "

I think we all agree, but let me suggest something that we may not all agree on. I am convinced that nothing will change until those in power have more fear of their ultimate meeting with Christ, Hebrews 9:27, than they love money, power and having sex with 7 to 11 year olds.