Why would the GOP weaken the EPA?

brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,435
edited August 2011 in A Moving Train
Will somebody please explain to me why the GOP wants to weaken the EPA? Yeah, ok, it may not be a perfect branch of our not-perfect government, but the EPA is one way to keep the gross polluters at least somewhat at bay and right now this ailing planet can use all the help it can get. Read the troublesome news here:
:(

http://news.yahoo.com/gops-hidden-debt- ... 00435.html
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young













Post edited by Unknown User on
«134

Comments

  • JeanwahJeanwah Posts: 6,363
    Because the heavy polluters are all for deregulation and who to make that happen for them but the GOP!

    Not to mention all those corps and companies polluting are the ones lining the GOP's pockets come election time.... Think oil and coal companies, Clorox corp., etc. etc.
  • WhyGo77WhyGo77 Posts: 113
    It would be a grave mistake...I sincereley hope that it doesn't happen, but this is the U.S. Government and it seems like anything is possible these days.

    After spending 11 years in DC and working alongside almost 20 government agencies (including the EPA) I can name several other agencies that should get the heave-ho before the EPA.
    "I'll ride the wave, where it takes me..."

    "I know I was born and I know that I'll die, the in between is mine..."
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,619
    brianlux wrote:
    Will somebody please explain to me why the GOP wants to gut the EPA? Yeah, ok, it may not be a perfect branch of our not-perfect government, but the EPA is one way to keep the gross polluters at least somewhat at bay and right now this ailing planet can use all the help it can get. Read the troublesome news here:
    :(

    http://news.yahoo.com/gops-hidden-debt- ... 00435.html

    because they are republicans!
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    because they have lost their minds and lost touch with reality.

    see how they would feel if their kids experienced health issues from the lead smelter in their neighborhood...

    oh wait, my bad...republican congress people make enough money that they can afford to live away from the lead smelter, so it is not their problem. it is the problem of the middle and lower classes who can only afford to live near the smelter.

    this is actually happening in missouri. the city of herculaneum has a lead smelter, the doe run smelter, and many many people in herky are very sick. the cancer rate is disproportionate to that of the rest of the state and the rest of the country. it would be worse if the epa had not stepped in to close the smelter.

    let's be serious for a minute.

    i think gutting the epa would be a grave mistake.

    do you republicans on here really believe that gutting the epa is a good thing for this country? if so, why? or is it just another government agency that is getting in the way of business to you?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    because they have lost their minds and lost touch with reality.

    see how they would feel if their kids experienced health issues from the lead smelter in their neighborhood...

    oh wait, my bad...republican congress people make enough money that they can afford to live away from the lead smelter, so it is not their problem. it is the problem of the middle and lower classes who can only afford to live near the smelter.

    this is actually happening in missouri. the city of herculaneum has a lead smelter, the doe run smelter, and many many people in herky are very sick. the cancer rate is disproportionate to that of the rest of the state and the rest of the country. it would be worse if the epa had not stepped in to close the smelter.

    let's be serious for a minute.

    i think gutting the epa would be a grave mistake.

    do you republicans on here really believe that gutting the epa is a good thing for this country? if so, why? or is it just another government agency that is getting in the way of business to you?

    that is nuts. we should talk about this a bit more in depth. you can educate me some. lead smelters?
    i'll researh that right now. missouri maps are nice. you should post some of this information here.

    iowa is fucked with farming chemicals. cancer rates are insane. both my dad's parents died of colon and stomach cancers, they drank out of a well near a corn fields.

    crop dusters destroyed my mom's bees back in the 70's. almost killed my brother, a cloud of crazy shit falling from above.

    this government is out of order, out of control.

    we will have an EPA or shit'll hit the fan im sure.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    sick that jesse ventura on these bastards. he's a god damn sexual tyrannosaurus for christ sakes.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    chadwick wrote:
    that is nuts. we should talk about this a bit more in depth. you can educate me some. lead smelters?
    i'll researh that right now. missouri maps are nice. you should post some of this information here.

    iowa is fucked with farming chemicals. cancer rates are insane. both my dad's parents died of colon and stomach cancers, they drank out of a well near a corn fields.

    crop dusters destroyed my mom's bees back in the 70's. almost killed my brother, a cloud of crazy shit falling from above.

    this government is out of order, out of control.

    we will have an EPA or shit'll hit the fan im sure.
    yeah that lead smelter issue has been going on for as long as i can remember. missouri has a lot of lead, and through a process called strip mining to get to the buried lead, it has ruined a lot of land here and made it uninhabitable due to the resulting lead poisoning. people can't live there, and it is toxic to eat the animals that live in those areas. it is quite sad actually. the epa has gotten involved and has been working to penalize the owners of the smelter. a brief history can be found here:

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 96cac.html

    and a few days ago there was a massive judgement againt the smelter. look at the figures awarded in this case, thanks in large part to the epa...

    $320 million verdict in lead smelter case sends clear message

    http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 55cfa.html
    Posted: Saturday, July 30, 2011



    ST. LOUIS • The mystery Friday afternoon was not whether the jury would punish the Herculaneum lead smelter's former owners for negligently exposing 16 children to harmful lead pollution.

    The jury had already said it planned to award punitive damages, on top of a $38.5 million verdict as compensation for health problems and lost lifetime earnings.

    The only question still lingering in the St. Louis Circuit courtroom at the end of a three-month trial was the size of that award.

    The answer: $320 million.

    The amount surprised even the plaintiffs' attorneys. They had suggested to the jury a punitive award that was one-third lower.

    "I'm stunned," said Gerson Smoger, a Dallas attorney who worked on the case with St. Louis attorney Mark Bronson.

    "They obviously wanted to send a message: Don't choose profits over people," Bronson said. "That's what this case is about."

    Aside from the expected appeals and post-trial motions, this was the last phase in a lengthy and complex case, and it carried with it one last surprise with the staggering verdict.

    Attorneys for the defendants departed the courtroom without commenting, their papers and files wheeled out in boxes as soon as court adjourned. The plaintiffs and their families, who cried and hugged after hearing the verdict, declined to comment. So did jurors leaving the courthouse.

    This case was just one of many targeting the massive lead smelter in Herculaneum, about 30 miles south of St. Louis. The lawsuits claim former and current owners knowingly exposed residents to lead pollution, a neurotoxin that is especially harmful to children. Plaintiffs' attorneys said their clients, children growing up near the smelter, suffered lost IQ points and other health effects from lead poisoning that the company knew existed and only reluctantly revealed.

    This case is the first to reach trial. Current owners of the smelter, Doe Run Resources Corp., settled claims with the plaintiffs earlier this year, according to court records. The court case then centered on the plant's operation from 1986 to 1994 under former owners Texas-based Fluor Corp., Virginia-based A.T. Massey Coal and Missouri-based Doe Run Investment Holdings Co.

    On Thursday, the jury returned verdicts awarding compensatory and punitive damages. The compensatory amount was announced immediately, with the plaintiffs receiving awards of $1.25 million to more than $3 million each.

    A separate hearing was held Friday to put a number on the punitive award, which in Missouri is allowed to be used to punish wrongdoing and deter future acts.

    What happened during the hearing helps illuminate how the jury made its $320 million decision.

    The day started with a forensic economist's describing just how big and profitable a company such as Fluor is. Robert W. Johnson, hired by the plaintiffs, noted that Fluor posted $20.8 billion in revenue last year. The company also spent $265.2 million on stock repurchases and dividends. Johnson called it "free cash."

    Bronson asked him to explain the term.

    "Free to leave the company as designated by the company and it will do no harm," he replied.

    Johnson also noted the financial status of A.T. Massey, which reported $3 billion in revenue last year and which was bought during the trial for $8.5 billion, and the Doe Run holding company, which had no financial data.

    Jack Quinn, the defendants' attorney, took a different tack with Johnson. Quinn reminded him that these companies were publicly traded and so were owned by pension funds and individual investors. But Johnson demurred, saying institutional investors accounted for almost all of the outstanding stock.

    The two sides then made their final pleas to the jury to see things their way, to potentially raise or lower the amount of punitive damages.

    Quinn, having already lost on the decision to award damages, tried to limit the amount.

    "You have made your decision. I respect what you've done. Fluor respects what you've done," he told the jury.

    He reminded the jury's six men and six women that they already had awarded a $38.5 million verdict. Quinn called it "a significant amount of money" and "a clear message."

    "Do you think management doesn't hear it? They heard your message," he said. "I believe your message has been sent and it's been sent pretty clearly."

    As he neared the end of his argument, Quinn pointed out that the verdict form allows for an amount of zero.

    "I'm not telling you to write 'none,'" he said. "But what the instructions recognize is, if you think that the message already has been sent."

    Smoger, pleading once more for the plaintiffs, ended the hearing.

    He attacked the Fluor leadership that, he said, allowed the lead poisonings to happen and never bothered to even show up in court.

    "You've been here for months and you've never heard that they've done anything wrong. You've never heard, 'I'm sorry,'" Smoger said.

    —"'We don't care. We're not sorry.' That's the message that you're hearing," he added.

    The jury then went out to make its decision. The plaintiffs had asked for $208 million. The jury returned two hours later.

    The verdicts for each of the 16 plaintiffs were identical: 11 of 12 jurors had agreed, $15 million in punitive damages from Fluor, $3 million from A.T. Massey and $2 million from the Doe Run holding company.

    That added up to $320 million.

    The last thing that Smoger had told the jurors before they made their decision seemed to have resonated, carried with them from the courtroom and into their deliberations.

    "They hurt these children and did it for money. In our system, we can only punish them with what is most valuable to them," he said, adding, "We punish them with money."



    Lead smelter verdict

    • $320 million in punitive damages

    (Split equally among 16 plaintiffs, $20 million each.)

    • $38.5 million compensatory damages

    (Awards of $1.5 million to $3 million for each plaintiff.)

    • Total damages awarded: $358.5 million
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    dunno what we need lead for?
    why would anyone wanna work in such a place?
    im confused :?
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,435
    Good input everyone!

    Lead poisoning is said to have played a role in the downfall of the Roman Empire. And looking at the info provided by gimmesometruth27, it's plain to see we haven't come very far. The very notion of gutting the EPA is further proof we're in deap shit. USA- (and pretty much everybody else), it's time to get our heads out of our asses.
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    brianlux wrote:
    Good input everyone!

    Lead poisoning is said to have played a role in the downfall of the Roman Empire. And looking at the info provided by gimmesometruth27, it's plain to see we haven't come very far. The very notion of gutting the EPA is further proof we're in deap shit. USA- (and pretty much everybody else), it's time to get our heads out of our asses.
    what can we do?
    im good at some things
    not so good at other things.

    i am not a politically correct guy.
    i love environmental science and root for earth first everytime
    i wanna do something about fighting pollution and the like.
    i wish we could physically fight people that hold these kinds of positions.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,435
    chadwick wrote:
    brianlux wrote:
    Good input everyone!

    Lead poisoning is said to have played a role in the downfall of the Roman Empire. And looking at the info provided by gimmesometruth27, it's plain to see we haven't come very far. The very notion of gutting the EPA is further proof we're in deap shit. USA- (and pretty much everybody else), it's time to get our heads out of our asses.
    what can we do?
    im good at some things
    not so good at other things.

    i am not a politically correct guy.
    i love environmental science and root for earth first everytime
    i wanna do something about fighting pollution and the like.
    i wish we could physically fight people that hold these kinds of positions.

    Write or call your representative (senator, mayor, etc.) I've heard that one hand written letter or call speaks for 100 people (please, somebody, correct me on that if I'm mistaken), and is much more effective than one-click advocating on your computer (although that is better than nothing).
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    yes you are right on the written letter bit.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."

    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    they would want to kill it because they are looking for huge cost savings ... before they would just appoint industry folks to lead the EPA so they wouldn't really be a bother but now that reality has set in ... they are looking for huge departments they can sack altogether ... and although conservatives of old fought for the environment ... modern day conservatives now don't care and see environmental laws as a hindrance to "progress" or ultimately profitability ...
  • ParachuteParachute Posts: 409
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,435
    Parachute wrote:
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.

    So we should let our freedom to choose light bulbs trump our kids and grandkids freedom to live in a clean, safe, flourishing world? :?
    "Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
    -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"

    "Try to not spook the horse."
    -Neil Young













  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,495
    brianlux wrote:
    Parachute wrote:
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.

    So we should let our freedom to choose light bulbs trump our kids and grandkids freedom to live in a clean, safe, flourishing world? :?

    The EPA has power over the world?
    hippiemom = goodness
  • MotoDCMotoDC Posts: 947
    What role did the EPA play in the verdict against the MO lead smelter? In the articles posted so far, all I see is this:
    STL Today wrote:
    In early 2007, the EPA found high concentrations of lead in dust collected on roads near Doe Run's Herculaneum smelter; trucks leaving mines in Reynolds, Iron and Dent counties have at times been coated with lead. Spills of lead ore and concentrate also have occurred in the mining district and have not always been cleaned to acceptable levels, the EPA said.

    Tests conducted last year of 372 properties within a mile of the Herculaneum lead smelter found 129 properties contained lead at levels beyond the EPA's allowable limit of 400 parts per million. Of those, 104 properties had already undergone EPA-ordered soil remediation in the last nine years.

    Jack and Leslie Warden lived about three blocks from the Herculaneum smelter for 16 years but moved to Festus after accepting a buyout from Doe Run six years ago. They filed a successful lawsuit with Logan Smith's group that prompted the EPA to adopt tougher air quality standards for lead in 2008.

    The real kick-in-the-pants for the smelter was the lawsuit.

    At the end of the day, however, the EPA is a drop in the bucket of Federal waste ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/environmental.pdf ). I'm sure it could use an overhaul, but as WhyGo said, there are plenty of other agencies to rip up as well.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    not to derail the thread, but to add to it. they are wanting to gut the epa and now they want to gut the faa too. they just went on a month long recess without resolving that issue, and now we are going to miss out on $1 billion in airline taxes and they are passing those costs on to the customers...

    our government and elected officials are fucking morons.

    FAA shutdown to continue as Congress leaves

    http://news.yahoo.com/faa-shutdown-cont ... 09095.html
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    MotoDC wrote:
    What role did the EPA play in the verdict against the MO lead smelter? In the articles posted so far, all I see is this:
    STL Today wrote:
    In early 2007, the EPA found high concentrations of lead in dust collected on roads near Doe Run's Herculaneum smelter; trucks leaving mines in Reynolds, Iron and Dent counties have at times been coated with lead. Spills of lead ore and concentrate also have occurred in the mining district and have not always been cleaned to acceptable levels, the EPA said.

    Tests conducted last year of 372 properties within a mile of the Herculaneum lead smelter found 129 properties contained lead at levels beyond the EPA's allowable limit of 400 parts per million. Of those, 104 properties had already undergone EPA-ordered soil remediation in the last nine years.

    Jack and Leslie Warden lived about three blocks from the Herculaneum smelter for 16 years but moved to Festus after accepting a buyout from Doe Run six years ago. They filed a successful lawsuit with Logan Smith's group that prompted the EPA to adopt tougher air quality standards for lead in 2008.

    The real kick-in-the-pants for the smelter was the lawsuit.

    At the end of the day, however, the EPA is a drop in the bucket of Federal waste ( http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/environmental.pdf ). I'm sure it could use an overhaul, but as WhyGo said, there are plenty of other agencies to rip up as well.
    this has been going on since at least 1996 and there were hundreds of articles on this. they have been fined by the epa on numerous occasions. i really don't feel like going through all of it, that is why i said to google "doe run smelter" or "herculaneum lead smelter". there is more info about epa involvement than you would ever want to know.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Go BeaversGo Beavers Posts: 9,196
    Parachute wrote:
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.

    You don't get enough light from burning your old car tires?
  • ParachuteParachute Posts: 409
    Go Beavers wrote:
    Parachute wrote:
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.

    You don't get enough light from burning your old car tires?


    I don't get it.
  • ParachuteParachute Posts: 409
    brianlux wrote:
    Parachute wrote:
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.

    So we should let our freedom to choose light bulbs trump our kids and grandkids freedom to live in a clean, safe, flourishing world? :?


    if you are depending on Gubmint to ensure your kids freedom, then you've already lost it.

    "Those who would trade Liberty for Security deserve neither."
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    Hey now! Leave the EPA alone! The appear to be one of the few government agencies that didn't show up armed as a swat team to bust these people for selling raw milk:

    http://www.naturalnews.com/033220_Rawes ... raids.html

    WOW.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    list of epa accomplishments from 1970-1995... i would hate to think of the shithole of a country we would be living in if some of these things had gone on unabated...

    A Look at EPA Accomplishments: 25 Years of Protecting Public Health and the Environment

    http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/epa/25b.html

    1970
    •On December 2, the United States Environmental Protection Agency is established to protect the nation's public health and environment. Its national role includes finding ways to cleanup and prevent pollution, ensuring compliance and enforcement of environmental laws, assisting states in environmental protection efforts, and scientific research and education to advance the nation's understanding of environmental issues.

    •Under amendments to the Clean Air Act, EPA moves to protect public health by setting national health-based standards for air pollutants, setting standards for auto emissions, and requiring states to submit new air quality plans.

    1971
    •EPA and the Department of Housing and Urban Development are charged with protecting children's health through lead-based paint prevention activities, including detection and treatment of lead-based paint poisoning, limiting lead use in certain consumer items, and banning the use of lead-based interior paints in residences built or renovated by the federal government.
    1972
    •EPA bans use of DDT because the widely-used pesticide is found to be cancer-causing and accumulating in the food chain, posing a risk to public health and the environment.

    •To limit raw sewage flowing into the nation's rivers, lakes and streams, EPA embarks on a major national commitment to build an advanced network of sewage treatment facilities. By 1988, virtually all U.S. cities will have built or committed to build such facilities, resulting in rivers and lakes that are safe for swimming, tourism and commercial and recreational fishing.

    •The United States and Canada sign the International Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to begin cleanup of the Great Lakes, which contain 95 percent of the nation's fresh water and supply drinking water for 23 million Americans.

    1973
    •EPA begins the ban that will phase out all use of lead in gasoline, resulting in a 98% reduction in lead levels in the air. The phase-out protects millions of children from serious, permanent learning disabilities by helping to reduce blood lead levels by 75%.

    •EPA issues its first permit limiting a factory's discharges of pollution into waterways, starting a program that now holds more than 45,000 industrial facilities accountable for water pollution.

    1974
    •Under the new Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA begins work to protect public health by setting health-based standards governing the quality of the public water supply, including requirements for physical and chemical treatment of drinking water.

    •EPA sets the first national standards limiting industrial water pollution, launching a program that today prevents one billion pounds of toxics from reaching our rivers, lakes, and streams each year.

    1975
    •EPA assumes responsibility for annually monitoring how cars and light trucks perform under new fuel economy standards--a move that, for the first time, allows consumers to choose cars based on their energy efficiency--under the new Energy Policy and Conservation Act.

    •Car makers begin installing catalytic converters in new motor vehicles to meet EPA emission standards designed to protect public health from harmful air pollution.

    1976
    •Responding to public concern over "midnight dumping" of toxic wastes, EPA starts to establish controls over hazardous waste from the time it is generated, through transportation, treatment, storage and disposal, under the new Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

    •EPA begins efforts to protect public health through controls on toxic chemicals that pose an unreasonable risk of injury. The new Toxic Substances Control Act sets the stage for EPA's ban that will phase out production and use of cancer-causing PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls), a widely-used material often discharged into the environment.

    1977
    •Air quality and visibility in national parks and wilderness is further protected with new amendments to the Clean Air Act, with provisions that preserve clean air in these important natural areas.
    1978
    •EPA and other federal agencies ban the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) as a propellant in most aerosol cans. CFCs destroy the earth's ozone layer, which protects life on earth from the harmful ultraviolet rays of the sun.
    1979
    •Because of their potential for causing cancer and other adverse health effects, EPA bans two herbicides containing dioxins, chemical compounds that are byproducts of certain industrial activities that cause cancer and other adverse health effects. One of the herbicides was an ingredient in the defoliant Agent Orange.
    1980
    •Building on earlier efforts to clean up toxic waste sites, EPA develops a nationwide program for toxic waste site cleanups under the new Superfund law, as well as establishing a list of the most hazardous toxic sites in the U.S. The new law is in part prompted by Love Canal--an industrial dumping ground since the 1970s--which New York State declared a "grave and imminent peril" to nearby residents two years earlier.
    1984
    •Concerns about gasoline and hazardous chemicals seeping from storage tanks and landfills into underground drinking water supplies prompt new amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, under which EPA institutes efforts to prevent such contamination and require treatment of hazardous wastes prior to land disposal.
    1985
    •After British scientists report a giant hole in the Earth's protective atmospheric ozone layer, EPA joins an international convention in Vienna calling for worldwide cooperative efforts to eliminate use of substances that deplete the ozone layer.
    1986
    •Public concern about explosions and leaks of toxic chemicals, such as occurred in Bhopal, India, helps lead to passage of the first community right-to-know law directing manufacturers, users and storers of certain chemicals to keep records about the location, quantity, use, and any release of those materials, and for EPA to make such information available to the public. EPA also begins to work with states and localities to prevent accidents and develop emergency plans in the case of dangerous releases of chemicals.
    1987
    •The United States is one of 24 nations that sign the Montreal Protocol, pledging to phase out production of CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons), which are widely used as refrigerants and aerosols but are linked to destruction of the protective atmospheric ozone layer.
    1989
    •EPA makes publicly available the first annual community right-to-know information on the location and nature of toxic chemical releases in communities around the country, through the new Toxics Release Inventory. A major chemical corporation pledges to reduce such releases by 90% (and later meets that goal).
    1990
    •EPA assesses a penalty of $15 million--the largest single civil penalty in the Agency's history--against Texas Eastern Gas Pipeline Company, for extensive PCB contamination at 89 sites. In addition to the fine, the company is required to pay for PCB cleanups estimated to exceed $750 million.

    •EPA develops and implements new Clean Air Act Amendments under which states must, for the first time, demonstrate continuing progress toward meeting national health-based air quality standards for harmful pollutants such as smog and carbon monoxide.

    •In keeping with the new Pollution Prevention Act that encourages industry to control toxic emissions by using cost-effective changes in production, EPA inaugurates the first major public-private partnership to significantly reduce polluting industrial emissions.

    •Reducing Risk, a landmark report from EPA's Science Advisory Board, calls for the setting of national environmental priorities and greater use of science in decision-making on environmental regulation.

    1991
    •In the largest environmental criminal damage settlement in history, Exxon Corporation and Exxon Shipping agree to pay $25 million in fines, $100 million in immediate payment to the U.S. and Alaska governments for restoration work, and establish a $900 million remediation fund arising from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

    •Under EPA's coordination, all Federal agencies begin using recycled and recyclable products whenever possible, under a new government-wide policy, a move that will vastly increase the market for such products. Separately, EPA finds that recycling of hazardous wastes has increased 127% in just the two-year period since 1989.

    •EPA joins other federal agencies in assessing the danger to human health and environmental damage from the intentional oil spills and 700 oil well fires set by Iraqi troops in Kuwait during the Arabian Gulf War.

    1992
    •To protect seashore recreation, ocean life, and the fishing industry, EPA's ban ends dumping of sewage sludge into oceans and coastal waters.
    1993
    •EPA consolidates and toughens its environmental enforcement program to ensure compliance with environmental laws and to penalize polluters who break those laws.

    •EPA announces the Common Sense Initiative, a sweeping effort to fundamentally shift environmental regulation--moving away from the pollutant-by-pollutant, crisis-by-crisis approach of the past to an industry-by-industry approach for the future. This new approach is designed to achieve results that are cleaner, cheaper and smarter--cleaner for the environment, cheaper for business and taxpayers, and smarter for America's future.

    •To protect public health and increase food safety, EPA begins a major initiative to encourage manufacturers to develop new, safer pesticides.

    •EPA's comprehensive scientific evaluation of independent research finds that secondhand cigarette smoke can cause cancer and impair the respiratory health of children and others.

    •EPA reports that curbside recycling programs and related efforts have tripled the recycling rate for the nation's trash--from 7% of all non-hazardous waste collected in 1970 to nearly 22% in 1993.

    1994
    •EPA announces a new set of pollution-control standards to reduce by 90% the toxic air pollutants from chemical plants by 1997. This action will result in the biggest reduction in air toxics in U.S. history.

    •After decades of conflict, the Clinton Administration negotiates a consensus plan to protect the most valuable economic and environmental resource of the state of California--water. The San Francisco Bay Delta supplies drinking water to two-thirds of the State's people and provides irrigation for 45% of America's fruits and vegetables.

    •Superfund cleanups are greatly accelerated, resulting in as many cleanups completed in 12 months as were completed in the program's first decade--an accomplishment that will be repeated in 1995 as well.

    •New grants are launched by EPA to help 50 U.S. communities revitalize inner-city brownfields--abandoned, contaminated sites that were formerly industrial or commercial properties--and return them to productive use for the community, resulting in both economic and environmental gains.

    •The Clinton Administration nearly doubles the list of toxic chemicals that must be publicly reported under the community right-to-know laws, giving Americans a dramatic increase in the information they need about toxic pollution from manufacturing facilities in communities nationwide.

    1995
    •Two-thirds of the U.S. metropolitan areas with unhealthy air in 1990 have now met air quality standards, making the air safer to breathe for 50 million Americans in major cities such as San Francisco and Detroit.

    •EPA issues new requirements for municipal incinerators to reduce toxic emissions by 90%.

    •To achieve better environmental results, provide regulatory flexibility, and maintain accountability, President Clinton announces Project XL--for excellence and leadership. Under the new initiative, 50 companies, facilities, states and localities will develop innovative ways to achieve results that go beyond those required by environmental regulations--and do so in more common-sense and cost-effective ways.


    but yeah let's cut this useless moneygrubbing freedom limiting government agency....

    :roll:
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    here is more...

    Saturday, February 5, 2011
    Top EPA accomplishments
    The Aspen Institute has published a list of “10 ways the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has strengthened America over the past 40 years.” By the way, the EPA was founded by the Nixon administration in 1970. The EPA has helped protect and preseve God's earth in many ways.

    •Banned widespread use of the pesticide DDT, which was killing off wildlife and threatening public health.
    •Greatly reduced acid rain due to reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions. Acid rain pollutes water sources.
    •Changed public views of waste, which led to innovations making use of waste to create energy and make new products.
    •Banned lead from gasoline.
    •Classified secondhand smoke as a known cause of cancer. This led to smoking bans in indoor public places, thereby improving public health.
    •Set strict emission standards for pollutants emitted by cars and trucks.
    •Regulated toxic chemicals and encouraged development of less harmful ones.
    •Established a national commitment to restore and maintain the safety of fresh water (the Clean Water Act).
    •Promoted fair environmental protection for minority and low-income citizens.
    •Increased the amount of public information about chemicals and/or pollutants people may be exposed to in their daily lives.

    Current EPA focus areas
    •Dealing with climate change.
    •Further improving air quality.
    •Assuring the safety of chemicals used in everyday products.
    •Protecting increasingly compromised waterways and coastal areas.
    •Building stronger state and tribal partnerships.
    •Expanding protection for underrepresented communities.
    Potential future problems

    Any of the possible types of roadblocks listed below could hamper the EPA in improving our national stewardship of God's earth.

    •An unfriendly Congress.
    •Weak White House resolve.
    •Public apathy

    •Future natural and man-made disasters that divert both attention and resources.

    http://creationcareteam.blogspot.com/20 ... ments.html
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    For the record, I am not a fan of federal government agencies existing to make the rules at all. There is no legislative process with them. No checks and balances. Whoever is in charge, makes the rules, and there seems to be some really odd inconsistencies within the rules. Take the story I just posted in the above link. People can be busted for selling raw milk, but not cigarettes? But hey, as long as we tax the shit out of cigarettes, and people keep buying them, I guess they're ok. Raw milk just ain't popular enough to earn that "this is wrong, but profitable for government" status.

    Why is an EPA necessary? Why can't environmental protection happen through bills in Congress, or even better yet, state and local rules against hurting someone else's (private), or everyone else's (public) property?

    No one has a right to pollute anyone else's land, air, or water. No one has a right to destroy public land. I recognize the intent behind every alphabet agency there is, but I do not agree with how they can be given so much power to make laws / regulations. Again, who takes advantage of this power but people who seek power?
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    No one has a right to pollute anyone else's land, air, or water. No one has a right to destroy public land. I recognize the intent behind every alphabet agency there is, but I do not agree with how they can be given so much power to make laws / regulations. Again, who takes advantage of this power but people who seek power?
    yes, but people DO do those things. and without the epa and what it has done it would be continued and most likely worse.

    and to answer your questions about why the epa exists instead of having these things controlled by laws passed in congress...congress can't even agree if the sky is blue. how are they going to agree on things based on science, like what is an acceptable level of lead or does it harm the environment if we dump sewage into the ocean? especially when one half does not believe in science, but, rather, that jesus is coming back in their lifetime to begin the rapture, so why save the world for their grandkids?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    edited August 2011
    Parachute wrote:
    brianlux wrote:
    Parachute wrote:
    So that I can buy whichever light bulb I want to.

    So we should let our freedom to choose light bulbs trump our kids and grandkids freedom to live in a clean, safe, flourishing world? :?


    if you are depending on Gubmint to ensure your kids freedom, then you've already lost it.

    "Those who would trade Liberty for Security deserve neither."

    Parachute, you rock.
    Post edited by usamamasan1 on
  • VINNY GOOMBAVINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,818
    No one has a right to pollute anyone else's land, air, or water. No one has a right to destroy public land. I recognize the intent behind every alphabet agency there is, but I do not agree with how they can be given so much power to make laws / regulations. Again, who takes advantage of this power but people who seek power?
    yes, but people DO do those things. and without the epa and what it has done it would be continued and most likely worse.

    and to answer your questions about why the epa exists instead of having these things controlled by laws passed in congress...congress can't even agree if the sky is blue. how are they going to agree on things based on science, like what is an acceptable level of lead or does it harm the environment if we dump sewage into the ocean? especially when one half does not believe in science, but, rather, that jesus is coming back in their lifetime to begin the rapture, so why save the world for their grandkids?

    You just raised a great question, which raises a serious number of other questions that are worth answering by everyone on the train here, and in the country. If Congress can't agree on anything, why don't we just have a president, and a boatload of agencies do the governing? Is it worth having individual state governments? Should everything be more unified and centralized to a small group of trustworthy people?

    In some ways, do we already have this system? Is it working better than it is failing?

    Maybe, if government agencies are the way to go, why don't the people directly elect them as well, instead of choosing representatives and senators?

    Personally, I prefer governance as locally as possible, with the shortest possible terms. But, I also agree on how horrible Congress is, but I don't think many of our presidents have been any better. Them checking each other is the best thing they actually have going, when they actually choose to do it instead of simply giving away their power to each other.
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    Short answer: Republicans don't like regulation.
    ...
    We should let everyone regulate themselves... you know, like the way the Wall Streeters and banks regulated themselves. Because, everyone is honest and looks out for what best for all of us, not just THEIR best interests... right?
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.