Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RWR8189
Eliminating EPA will do more harm that good, imo. Just look at third world countries where there is no check by the authorities and extreme pollution is the fact of life.

The key is to make EPA more effective and not just throwing money at it. Prez Bush's plan sounds good to me. Fund necessary projects such as clean drinking water, toxic and waste cleanup, etc., and eliminate unnecessary ones that are waste of resources and tax money.

6 posted on 02/07/2005 8:17:53 PM PST by sagar (Straight trees are cut first and honest people are screwed first_ Chanakya, 4th c. BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: sagar

"eliminate unnecessary ones that are waste of resources and tax money."

Start with the unconstitutional taking of private property without due process.

We need a constitutional amendment that swamps are to be called "swamps" and not "wetlands," jungles are to be called "jungles" and not "rainforests," and barking moonbat eco-whackos from Planet Stalin are to be called "barking moonbat eco-whackos from Planet Stalin" and not "environmentalists."


11 posted on 02/07/2005 8:24:00 PM PST by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: sagar

I'm an environmental scientist and run my own consulting company (since 1991). This is a good idea and President Bush has real guts for even proposing a cut in the EPA budget.

Environmental quality would improve if the EPA budget were cut by 1/3. Most people would not believe what the EPA is involved with these days. Yes, they have their own police force (more like a commando unit). The EPA throws money at the UN and the third world like it was going out of style. The Environmental Justice program is a complete political sham. The agency bureaucracy is enormously bloated and wasteful.

The EPA exceeded congressional authority long ago and needs to be reigned in, for the sake of our environment as well as the budget. It was a regulation factory before President Bush, terribly infected with environmental activism from the Clinton era: a place for watermelons to grow (green on the outside and red inside).

The NRDC and EDF literally wrote government policy and regulations for years. Their lawyers were inside the agency working every day for the activist organizations. The EPA needs a good scrubbin' and this is an excellent start.

Bush deserves high cudos for this move. I am in awe of his courage.


14 posted on 02/07/2005 8:41:05 PM PST by Amadeo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: sagar
Just wanted to say "ditto" to your comments--probably because I'm old enough to remember when the the Ohio River was polluted with raw sewage, hospital and slaughter-house wastes, etc., when the air smelled of sulphur fumes, black smoke made the sky invisible, and gritty soot covered everything.

Ah, yes, boys and girls: Let's get rid of the EPA and bring back them there "goo-oo-ood old days"!
18 posted on 02/07/2005 8:59:52 PM PST by Longwalled Newbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: sagar
Eliminating EPA will do more harm that good, imo. Just look at third world countries where there is no check by the authorities and extreme pollution is the fact of life.

This position presumes that it is not in a person's or corporation's best interests to maintain the value of their property. Thus, government control is required to protect society.

The presumption, however, is a false premise. Almost invariably, it is in the best interests of a property-owner to maintain his property in an environmentally friendly fashion. To do otherwise would simply be foolish. One doesn't go into business in order to destroy the value of one's assets.

Ask any farmer, for example. More often, it is EPA policies that are destroying the value of the property -- be it through the Endangered Species Program or Wetlands Protection.

As a people, economy and nation, we'd be better off without the EPA. Hell, the environment would be better off without the EPA. We can't do that overnight, of course. But reducing funding is a damn good start...

46 posted on 02/09/2005 8:33:01 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: sagar
Eliminating EPA will do more harm that good, imo

The EPA has harmed America in more ways than you can imagine. It is an agency that has not place in a free, constitutionally governed country.

The EPA is one of the driving agencies behind instituting sustainable development in America. Sustainable development is a threat to your liberty and the existance of America because it creates a global collective society and the apex of the sustainable development movement is the known corrupt and lawless body, the United Nations.

There are quite a few posts here but this thread is replete with information about sustainable development and agenda 21. As a patriotic and caring citizen, you my friend, do not want to see the EPA, the United Nations,sustainable development or Agenda 21 progress any further.

Big Media Won't Touch Agenda 21
58 posted on 02/10/2005 8:26:43 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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