H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

User avatar
peetso
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:44 am
Location: the edge of the Great Northern Muskeg
Contact:

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by peetso » Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:34 am

fallen513 wrote:Would you guys make your fuckin' minds up! I'm about to dump a quart of 10W-30 down the storm drain. Who do I call?
Just drink it, you pussy.
"Cheer up. You are not on fire." - jhnnythndr

the borealist

User avatar
SLSS
Posts: 6884
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 6:24 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by SLSS » Tue Feb 07, 2017 11:37 am

peetso wrote:
Transylwader wrote: Don, I am all for the state agencies. I enjoy working with the guys n gals down at DWQ, NCDEQ. They run a tight ship. I am just gob smacked how a huge Multi-Billion dollar corporation such as Dook Energy get to laugh about a destroyed river system because EPA won't hold them accountable.
Seems to me then that everyone should be arguing for giving the EPA more teeth, more autonomy to enforce infractions on larger corporations, as opposed to arguing for the abolishment of the agency.


"Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a good carpenter to build one." - Sam Rayburn
Politicians have been underfunding and interfering with federal agencies for years, then bitching about their incompetence/ineffectiveness/corruption. Are federal agencies always excellent? Of course not, but there has been a two sided agenda for years of 1- trying to eliminate almost any oversight, B- getting private access to nearly any pool of federal revenue (privatize Social Security, etc).

Privatizing the military and making healthcare for profit seems to be benefitting stockholders, and delivering everyone else less than.

Willi's right. The idea that industry will oversee itself. And back int eh 60's and 70's when it was really bad, corporations supposedly had the responsibility to be a good citizen. With that responsibility out the window, it will be worse.

And Tranny, yes, the orange river was a complete clusterfuck. But the EPA didn't create the problem, and it wasn't going to fix itself. Tougher regulations and rules to begin with, and effective enforcement of them, would seem to be the way to avoid that. Or like a lot of stuff, maybe we just leave it in the ground. Do we need it, or does somebody just want to make a profit on it?
It's lime the battles between sperm whales and giant squid half a mile below the surface of the ocean. Only it happens in the palm I your hand.- thndr

when I fall, I am still cold and wet, but much more stylishly dressed. as my hat disappears in the riffle- flybug.pa


"Sugar? No thank you Turkish, I'm sweet enough."

User avatar
ChaseChrome
Posts: 2821
Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 1:09 pm
Location: Inside the black, shiny eye of the ant...bish

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by ChaseChrome » Tue Feb 07, 2017 12:02 pm

E.A.D.
16387930_1678545192156452_61634153925183466_n.png
16387930_1678545192156452_61634153925183466_n.png (122.98 KiB) Viewed 541 times
All thinking men are atheists...E. Hemingway

Sometimes hipness is what it ain't...Tower of P

Apparently they believe that putting a see through skirt on a word makes it OK...Average Joe

User avatar
D-nymph
Posts: 4742
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: SWPA

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by D-nymph » Tue Feb 07, 2017 12:33 pm

peetso wrote:
Transylwader wrote: Don, I am all for the state agencies. I enjoy working with the guys n gals down at DWQ, NCDEQ. They run a tight ship. I am just gob smacked how a huge Multi-Billion dollar corporation such as Dook Energy get to laugh about a destroyed river system because EPA won't hold them accountable.
Seems to me then that everyone should be arguing for giving the EPA more teeth, more autonomy to enforce infractions on larger corporations, as opposed to arguing for the abolishment of the agency.

no?
Yes.
"The devil's pourin drinks and his daughter needs a ride" - III

User avatar
T.J. Brayshaw
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 7:35 pm
Location: Indiana
Contact:

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by T.J. Brayshaw » Tue Feb 07, 2017 2:33 pm

Currently, as far as I can tell none of us can read the text of the bill. So maybe it will say "Abolish the EPA and replace it with this much better thing." That's why I said it's something to keep an eye on.

If "this much better thing" turns out not to be better, then we have to decide whether the EPA, warts and all, is better than no EPA at all.

It's pretty hard for me to imagine how no EPA at all is better (and really, hard for me to imagine how this bunch will come up with something better to replace it), but I haven't called my representatives on this one yet. I'm waiting to see the text of the bill.

User avatar
fallen513
Posts: 3120
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 1:12 pm

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by fallen513 » Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:28 pm

T.J. Brayshaw wrote:Currently, as far as I can tell none of us can read the text of the bill.

Now hold on a mninute. Are you sayin' we don't read good?
____________________________________________________________________________________
I love flyfishing so much I want it to die. -thalweg

Isn't it TIME?

User avatar
B.M. Barrelcooker
Posts: 3214
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 7:57 pm
Location: Aintry

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by B.M. Barrelcooker » Wed Feb 08, 2017 5:50 am

fallen513 wrote:If somebody's gonna die from lead poisoning I want it to be my neighbors kids goddamint.
Move to Flint.


I think the "BM" on this mound actually stands for "bowel movement"; one of Franzen's, if I'm not mistaken...


User avatar
B.M. Barrelcooker
Posts: 3214
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 7:57 pm
Location: Aintry

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by B.M. Barrelcooker » Wed Feb 08, 2017 6:07 am

Willi wrote:I'm old enough to remember the days before the Clean Water/Air Acts. The air in our major cities rivaled that in China's cities today. Many of our streams, rivers and lakes were sewers. Lake Erie was essentially dead and the other Great Lakes were following. A major river was so polluted it actually caught fire. The creeks where I grew up had piles of foam higher than my head floating down and were so polluted that even carp couldn't live in them. Now they hold gamefish. Today the Great Lakes are excellent fisheries, there are many thousands more miles of streams and rivers that support gamefish, our air is breathable etc etc etc The EPA isn't perfect, but it sure is better than corporate self regulation.

Willi
Hey willi. I can remember too. I come from an area that was decimated by large scale strip mines for most of a century. I've also seen some of what the Agencies ( not just EPA but also mines and minerals etc ) consider acceptable reclamation. . It baffles me that " pre-law " areas that weren't reclaimed have recovered amazingly and are full of diverse flora fauna and species and things that were reclaimed large scale according to specifications are moonscape monocultures. I'm not really on one side of this argument or the other .

We are definitely far better off with the clean water and clean air acts and without an overburdensom cost to any of us personally.
I just have a general distrust of bearacracies much like my distrust of large corporations.

I think it's important that we all make decisions thoughtfully and despite the inconvenience sometimes ...vote with our dollars and only support business that act responsibly.

If we continue to buy from irresponsible outfits we are only encouraging their practices. That doesn't just apply here but anywhere in the world. After all we all live downstream.

Peace


I think the "BM" on this mound actually stands for "bowel movement"; one of Franzen's, if I'm not mistaken...


User avatar
Bruiser
Posts: 3445
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Land of Manana

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by Bruiser » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:14 am

You have to put your faith in something BM. I think you know that. I'd say pick your side, it's pretty simple. One side wants no rules or protections, the other side is the EPA. Pick your side.
That sounds awesome in my ears!! (P-A)

we were basking in goodness here with our everyday drivel that we enjoy.... the rest of this is horseshit, flybug.pa.

User avatar
peetso
Posts: 1684
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:44 am
Location: the edge of the Great Northern Muskeg
Contact:

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by peetso » Wed Feb 08, 2017 8:22 am

Bruiser wrote:You have to put your faith in something BM. I think you know that. I'd say pick your side, it's pretty simple. One side wants no rules or protections, the other side is the EPA. Pick your side.

"Cheer up. You are not on fire." - jhnnythndr

the borealist

Eider
Posts: 374
Joined: Wed Feb 15, 2006 1:01 am
Location: Snake basin

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by Eider » Thu Feb 09, 2017 11:56 am

Would you guys make your fuckin' minds up! I'm about to dump a quart of 10W-30 down the storm drain. Who do I call?
Depends on where your storm drain empties.

If into a navigable waterway via surface flow, the Secretary of the Army issues permits (CWA Section 404d). Enforcement and penalties are described in Section 311 and you'll have to answer to the EPA, the ACOE or both. Interestingly, the EPA is responsible for studying the effect of your oil dumping on water quality and aquatic life as stated in Section 104(m)(1).

If your storm drain empties into an isolated wetland (i.e., not directly connected to a navigable waterway via surface flow) then its still up to debate who you should call. The Supreme Court didn't come to a majority opinion in Rapanos v. United States , so I guess it's an open question subject to some complex legalese.

Or, at least that's how I understand it.

User avatar
B.M. Barrelcooker
Posts: 3214
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010 7:57 pm
Location: Aintry

Re: H.R. 861: Terminate the EPA

Post by B.M. Barrelcooker » Fri Feb 10, 2017 7:56 am



I think the "BM" on this mound actually stands for "bowel movement"; one of Franzen's, if I'm not mistaken...


Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests