Posted on 03/14/2017 10:17:13 AM PDT by rktman
The Trump administration is contemplating even deeper cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) budget than what’s already been reported by news outlets.
President Donald Trump’s budget proposal called for cutting EPA’s budget 25 percent, or $2 billion, and reducing the agency’s workforce 20 percent, or 3,000 employees. EPA global warming programs, grants to environmental groups and state grants are reportedly on the chopping block.
But now the White House is mulling even deeper cuts, a source familiar with budget talks told Axios. The source told Axios “[s]enior Trump officials consider the EPA the leading edge of the administration’s plans to deconstruct the administrative stat
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
The EPA mission should change to an agency that PREVENTS state and local versions from interfering with private property rights. It spent decades spreading itself and reproducing itself like a disease down to the state level. If it just goes away now, its children will still make life difficult for private property owners everywhere.
Works for me.
The sad thing is, there has been a problem with corporate and private business abuse of work sites.
In theory, something like the EPA should exist for oversight.
The problem with that is, it’s a government agency, and government agencies are obsessed with always finding new ground to take control of.
You can’t just get them to limit themselves to site management. Pretty soon they’ve glommed onto things far afield of that.
My reaction is that the EPA should cease to exist.
I guess the states would have to step in and make sure part of the unwinding process of businesses would be they clean up their own sites.
How you make sure a business has the funds to do that, if it’s going under, is beyond me.
What I do recognize, is that we cannot allow businesses to leave behind toxic chemical sites. And we do not want them polluting the ground water or air.
We don’t want them polluting the ground, etc., but it is not worth strangling the economy to regulate all that. Law, criminal and civil should handle it. And the courts are a little bit less amenable to corruption than are bureaucrats and their agents. A little bit.
I’m willing to go that route, but let me tell you, the locals don’t always pick up the gauntlet.
When I was kid, my grandfather used to drive us to school. It was on the way to his work.
One route we used took us by a plant. That plant had the most foul looking pond I’ve ever seen.
In addition, trees withing about 100 yards of the place died.
I’m not sure what they were doing there, but I wouldn’t have wanted anyone I cared about to work there.
Was that cleaned up? Is it still going? I don’t know, but there are concerns out there that have no morals whatsoever.
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.