[WIMom]

These departments have worked the system so well, it's one big circular fight. We can't fire them, but they work for us, but we can't fire them because they have a union, but they work for us, we can't fire them because a regulation says so. In business, if a department is not within budget, if employees are slacking, that department is downsized or eliminated. Why not a layoff? It happens in the real world. I just don't understand why these things can not happen in government. Is there some law? Who wrote the regulations? Why can't the regulations be modified? How are the regulations modified? Can a president decide to eliminate a department or does it have to go through the congress? Better yet, is there someplace I can read up on this? I don't think we need a fed EPA. Let the states handle it.

[Ben Ficklin]

"Let the States handle it"

In the mid to late 80s into the early 90s, the States were able to wrestle authority to regulate away from EPA. Not on everything, but most things. The main argument behind this was that the States wanted to solve problems and EPA only wanted to control things. A second argument was that the states would have the leeway to use whatever means they wanted to conform to the regs, whereas EPA did not have to consider things like economic impact.

During the 90s when the non-point regs were being worked up, regulation authority was given to the states.

Although the states decide how to meet the standards, EPA still sets those standards.