EPA now under attack

[zico20]

Trump has selected Oklahoma AG Scott Pruitt to lead the EPA. He is an outspoken critic of the EPA. Now we can start getting rid of all of these unnecessary regulations that has burdened companies.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...ad-agency.html

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by zico20

Trump has selected Oklahoma AG Scott Pruitt to lead the EPA. He is an outspoken critic of the EPA. Now we can start getting rid of all of these unnecessary regulations that has burdened companies.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...ad-agency.html

Great pick! An enemy of my enemy is my friend!

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by zico20

Trump has selected Oklahoma AG Scott Pruitt to lead the EPA. He is an outspoken critic of the EPA. Now we can start getting rid of all of these unnecessary regulations that has burdened companies.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...ad-agency.html

What are your favorite three regulations that need to go?

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

What are your favorite three regulations that need to go?

All of them

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

All of them

Just give me the top three. The worst of the worst.

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Just give me the top three. The worst of the worst.

Over the years I have read horror stories about people and jobs that were ruined by the EPA's Nazi like tactics..

For instance, a very close friend of mine, who owned his own trucking enterprise, was near the end of his run, where he was going to refuel upon the return...He had one side of his two 150 Gal tanks closed off, and he estimated that he had about 20 gals left to finish the day...More than enough as he was so near.. While sitting in traffic a car was changing lanes and that driver somehow managed to kiss the left side diesel tank of my friends big-rig...A slow leak was the result of that encounter...So, he pulled off the road, and the next thing you know, the police were on the scene, and a "hazmat crew" soon showed up...Sirens blaring and men in plastic jumpsuits all over the place !

The EPA fined him $25,000 for that "SPILL" and the minor cleanup....He managed to get it down to $5G's...

But still, when he took the truck in for repairs to the leaking tank, there was almost 15 gals that had to be drained before the repair...About a 5-gal loss...

And, it wasn't even his fault to begin with...But not to the EPA, it didn't matter, as he was the one responsible for his rig...

Crazy Law...I think..

[zico20]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

Just give me the top three. The worst of the worst.

You want me to go through hundreds of thousands of regulations and pick the worst three. That would take me years, so I won't do it. But here is one that must go ASAP.

The Unions Rule Rule. New rules require government contractors to give first preference in hiring to the workers of the company that lost the contract. Tens of thousands of companies will be affected, with compliance costs running into the tens of millions of dollars—costs ultimately borne by taxpayers. The rule effectively ensures that a non-unionized contractor cannot replace a unionized one. That’s because any new contractor will be obliged to hire its predecessors’ unionized workers and thus be forced by the “Successorship Doctrine” to bargain with the union(s).

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by zico20

You want me to go through hundreds of thousands of regulations and pick the worst three. That would take me years, so I won't do it. But here is one that must go ASAP.

The Unions Rule Rule. New rules require government contractors to give first preference in hiring to the workers of the company that lost the contract. Tens of thousands of companies will be affected, with compliance costs running into the tens of millions of dollars—costs ultimately borne by taxpayers. The rule effectively ensures that a non-unionized contractor cannot replace a unionized one. That’s because any new contractor will be obliged to hire its predecessors’ unionized workers and thus be forced by the “Successorship Doctrine” to bargain with the union(s).

That is not an EPA rule. That is a Department of Labor Rule. I asked you to give me the three most offensive EPA rules. There aren't hundreds of thousands of EPA regulations to go through. I just want to know what you see the EPA doing that doesn't constitute legitimate environmental protection. You must have some idea of what would cause you to think we need to repeal existing environmental rules. Just off the top of your head - what has affected you personally, or just generally pissed you off.

You realize there is no governmental rule that doesn't occur as a result of federal legislation passed by the Congress, right? The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, etc. Did you think agencies just decided for themselves when to pick on companies? No federal agency has power that wasn't granted to them specifically by Congress.

[dartman51]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

What are your favorite three regulations that need to go?

How about the one that prevents California farmers from getting water because of the "delta smelt". Just one in a long list of RIDICULOUS regulations, that do more harm than good.

You can find more here. http://wastefraudandabuse.org/stupid-epa-regulations/

[Ocala Mike]

Halv, the climate science deniers who are denizens of PA are against the EPA and everything it stands for because it is in their "government is the enemy" playbook. I would posit that three things that would be attacked first would be anything having to do with the Paris accords, the Clean Waters Act, and the new rule about release of methane into the atmosphere.

I liken this announcement nominating the former AG of the Sooner State as head of the EPA as akin to hiring Dracula to head up a blood bank.

[JustRalph]

1. Ethanol can be as high as 15% per gallon= ruins engines

2. Avg fuel economy standards......tampers with the car market

3. Demanding coal fired factories scrub down to limits less than appears naturally in some areas


Just off the top of my head. Pretty sure these are all EPA regs

[Clocker]

I wrote off the EPA as a credible or responsible organization some years ago when the head of the agency announced that one of its high priorities was "environmental justice". I have seen no evidence that Congress ever charged the EPA with maintaining "environmental justice", and have no trust for any governmental organization that assumes powers not specifically granted to it. It should have been reined in long ago.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by HalvOnHorseracing

That is not an EPA rule. That is a Department of Labor Rule. I asked you to give me the three most offensive EPA rules. There aren't hundreds of thousands of EPA regulations to go through. I just want to know what you see the EPA doing that doesn't constitute legitimate environmental protection. You must have some idea of what would cause you to think we need to repeal existing environmental rules. Just off the top of your head - what has affected you personally, or just generally pissed you off.

You realize there is no governmental rule that doesn't occur as a result of federal legislation passed by the Congress, right? The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, etc. Did you think agencies just decided for themselves when to pick on companies? No federal agency has power that wasn't granted to them specifically by Congress.

Very much not true. Ever hear of Executive Orders??

As for the EPA, it needs to be burned to the ground. Here is an article for you to read:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...mes-long-bible

Since President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued 2,827 new final regulations, equaling 24,915 pages in the Federal Register, totaling approximately 24,915,000 words.

The Gutenberg Bible is only 1,282 pages and 646,128 words. Thus, the new EPA regulations issued by the Obama Administration contain 19 times as many pages as the Bible and 38 times as many words.

It's insane that 2,827 new EPA regulations were required in the first five years of Obama's presidency. Since Congress is in session about 140 days per year, then according to you, four new EPA regulations were passed every day Congress was 'working' during Obama's first five years in office! How does a business keep up with that pace of regulatory over reach?

[Tom]

We don't deny climate, we just understand it is not going to be changed by anything a bunch of idiots do.

Bat Boy is a bigger threat than the climate.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Very much not true. Ever hear of Executive Orders??

As for the EPA, it needs to be burned to the ground. Here is an article for you to read:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/...mes-long-bible

Since President Barack Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued 2,827 new final regulations, equaling 24,915 pages in the Federal Register, totaling approximately 24,915,000 words.

The Gutenberg Bible is only 1,282 pages and 646,128 words. Thus, the new EPA regulations issued by the Obama Administration contain 19 times as many pages as the Bible and 38 times as many words.

It's insane that 2,827 new EPA regulations were required in the first five years of Obama's presidency. Since Congress is in session about 140 days per year, then according to you, four new EPA regulations were passed every day Congress was 'working' during Obama's first five years in office! How does a business keep up with that pace of regulatory over reach?

First, Executive Orders are not regulations. If the President could make rules about anything he pleased, we wouldn't need the Constitution or the Congress. The question isn't whether I've heard of Executive Orders, but whether you know what an Executive Order is and how it differs from a regulation.

The Bible is more like the enabling legislation - The Clean Air Act or the Clean Water Act - and the regulations are the implementation of the Acts. So the comparison is not direct. Now if you wanted to cite the number of words that had been written interpreting the Bible you'd have an appropriate comparison. What may sound like a lot of words is business as usual under every recent president.

To paraphrase the Emperor in Amadeus, if there are too many words, which ones need to go?