Posted on 05/22/2015 11:01:06 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
The Obama administration is expected in the coming days to announce a major clean water regulation that would restore the federal government’s authority to limit pollution in the nation’s rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands.
Environmentalists have praised the new rule, calling it an important step that would lead to significantly cleaner natural bodies of water and healthier drinking water.
But it has attracted fierce opposition from several business interests, including farmers, property developers, fertilizer and pesticide makers, oil and gas producers and a national association of golf course owners. Opponents contend that the rule would stifle economic growth and intrude on property owners’ rights.
Republicans in Congress point to the rule as another example of what they call executive overreach by the Obama administration. Already, they are advancing legislation on Capitol Hill meant to block or delay the rule. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“Under this outrageously broad new rule, Washington bureaucrats would now have a say in how farmers, and ranchers, and families use their own property,” said Senator John Barrasso, Republican of Wyoming and the chief author of the Senate bill.
“It would allow the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate private property just based on things like whether it’s used by animals or birds, or even insects,” he said.
“This rule,” he added, “is not designed to protect the traditional waters of the United States. It is designed to expand the power of Washington bureaucrats.”
FROM ARTICLE:
“It’s going to cause a nightmare for farmers,” said Don Parrish, the senior director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation.
“Our members own the majority of the landscape that’s going to be impacted by this,” he said. “It’s going to make their land, the most valuable thing they possess, less valuable. It could reduce the value of some farmland by as much as 40 percent. If you want to build a home, if you want to grow food, if you want a job to go with that clean water, you have to ask E.P.A. for it.”
Of course he is.
What’s worse? Obama for trying to exercise constitutionally nonexistant federal goverment power regarding intrastate environmental issues? Or low-information state lawmakers for seemingly remaining silent about Obama doing so?
This land ain’t yur land
This land ain’t my land
It belongs to the federal gubamint
And all its agencies
That slobber and drool at the public trough
No, No, No.
Smart people on FR keep assuring me that all job losses are due to NAFTA.
Only NAFTA.
Government over-regulation, union thuggery and greedy tort lawyers have never caused the loss of even one job in America.
And besides; if you want a job, and you ask the EPA for one - I'm sure they'll give it to you. After all, they're just another benevolent bureaucracy, aren't they?
"Strengthen" = more tyranny and more control from the Feds, less freedom and less property for you and me.
Why, oh, why, are we going along with this?
ANY EPA team on private property attempting to enforce their "Clean Water Act" bilge should be met with an armed presence, Bundy Ranch style.
I’m aure there are no increased taxes and it all has to do with maintaining the purity and samitation of the water.../s
8 gallons is your daily limit.
Why is your usage unlimited?
Because I’m the King, damnit!
(now shoot this guy and put his body in a lyme grave before he alerts the other about me)
Republicans in Congress point to the rule as another example of what they call executive overreach by the Obama administration. Already, they are advancing legislation on Capitol Hill meant to block or delay the rule. . . -—
Advancing legislation to block or delay =
Pubs will cave. 10 - 9 - 8 -
bump
cuál es mío es mío , cuál es el tuyo es mío también
This is a perfect 5th Amendment “takings” case.
Coming soon: now that the water running down your driveway is under federal control because it is a “navigable waterway”, the next step is to extend federal control over the water in your home’s pipes because they could easily end up watering your lawn, which would drain into your driveway, a long-established federal “navigable waterway”.
All your rights and property are belong to us.
Obama... FU...in the 60s the Connecticut River was called by some the most beautiful open sewer. When we boat on it, you could see dead fish on the water. Now, the Connecticut River is clean — WITHOUT YOUR HELP!!
“...legislation on Capitol Hill meant to block or delay the rule....”
But nothing about upholding/defending the Constitution and limits of Federalism by ABOLISHING said department.
Just another shrug of the shoulders, meaningless ‘reform’ and hand-out for $$ come election time stating “We’ll reduce govt...NEXT election”
Because the only thing standing between drinkable water and death/disease is a government bureaucracy.
California wants the water.
So, we’re not supposed to eat.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/05/new_york_times_eating_food_aggravates_drought.html
Why should the California government be the only one allowed to ration water use?
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.