I would really like to talk to Republicans about the EPA

Mierin

Mierin

Donor
I'm perfectly fine with looking into corruption and actual waste.

But I can't for the life of me understand why anyone other than corporations who cause a lot of pollution would want to make the EPA smaller or leave it up to states. It's easy as hell to explain why it's a terrible idea.

Let's say Sioux City and Omaha are both vying to get a big factory that will bring in lots of jobs and income, but this factory wants to dump a bunch of toxins into the river because it's more expensive to transport them or make them safer (not an expert on this).

South Dakota decides to make it legal to dump whatever they want in the river, so the factory opens in Sioux City.

They dump toxins into the river. The toxins have no effect on South Dakotans. They flow right out of the state. Everywhere the drinking water comes from the Missouri River has to spend more $ to treat the water so their citizens don't die or get sick. Nebraska, Missouri, etc. are all paying $ to solve an environmental problem that they didn't cause, because there is no EPA.

What happened/is happening in Flint could become a normal occurrence. (And before anyone chimes in and says "but Flint happened so it's not working!" not every single local environment or drinking water issue is dealt with by the EPA and on top of that, having it happen once is a lot better than having it happen more often).

I posted 2 articles in the environment thread showing Trump wants to drastically cut funding for cleanup in Chesapeake Bay and the Great Lakes. I think one of them was going from $75 million to $10 million. Those states are going to either have to raise their taxes or let those areas become wastelands. And the de-regulation when it comes to dumping is going to make it even worse.

The other thing is, don't people want to be able to go anywhere in the United States, especially pretty areas like those, and have them be clean? When I go to Rocky Mountain National Park I want it to be clean and pure. I'm perfectly fine with some of my federal tax $ going towards helping that be a reality, even though I don't live in Colorado.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting article on regulations I just found:


Basically, they've conditioned a whole heck of a lot of folks to think ANY regulation is bad. Burdensome, harmful to the economy, unnecessary, stupid phrases like "the administrative state" etc. etc. There's a negative psychological association there.

Granted, some of them probably do hamper business to varying degrees. I'm glad some of those changes in that article are good for business, but gee, they sound horrible for actual people...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
All regulations hamper businesses, but they do so in order to protect the public. There are some that are probably stupid but I'm assuming most should be there.

The reason regulations have to exist is because there are too many businesses that can't be trusted not to harm the general public. These businesses have no regard for anything except $. People have died because of companies who only saw profits and nothing else. $ is not more important than keeping people safe.

 
Moiraine said:
All regulations hamper businesses, but they do so in order to protect the public. There are some that are probably stupid but I'm assuming most should be there.

The reason regulations have to exist is because there are too many businesses that can't be trusted not to harm the general public. These businesses have no regard for anything except $. People have died because of companies who only saw profits and nothing else. $ is not more important than keeping people safe.
Click to expand...
it's a good thing the CEO's don't have kids or grand kids that would like a clean glass of water to drink or clean air to breathe in the future. all those $$$'s might be able to make up for those small things.

 
^ which is why I believe the research saying that 1/5 of corporate execs are psychopaths. They're unable to care about that stuff.

 
I guess what I'm getting at is that if I was given control of everything, I'd like to strike a balance. I'm sure that seems obvious, but I'd like to give a wee bit of deference to business groups and industries. There are certain concerns of theirs that are valid that I could get on board with, particularly someone like the small business-owner who's trying to become profitable if they're struggling rather than huge corporations looking to exploit the system to further their already monumental revenue.

But ultimately, I lean more towards your point of view, since I don't trust those businesses either. People who proudly proclaim the free market will root out these problems and keep people safe are either delusional or lying IMO.

It's extremely frustrating to watch regulations like universal background checks or keeping Flint's water supply safe fought by huge entities like the NRA or Michigan's government ultimately because of money. You're right - I fail to see how anyone can defend those unless they invoke money.

 
BRB has talked about regulations not related to the environment, just on employee safety, and I understand his frustration there. There are obviously ones that are silly.

He's also brought up a good argument that industry experts should have a say. But as an example it's hard to trust someone employed (or recently employed) by Exxon to work in the public'a best interests when it comes to oil-related environmental issues.

 
Moiraine said:
BRB has talked about regulations not related to the environment, just on employee safety, and I understand his frustration there. There are obviously ones that are silly.

He's also brought up a good argument that industry experts should have a say. But as an example it's hard to trust someone employed (or recently employed) by Exxon to work in the public'a best interests when it comes to oil-related environmental issues.
Click to expand...
Well - yeah. Trump has veered unapologetically into 100% deregulatory mode. Doesn't matter if it's good or bad for people, that's what he's doing. He's certainly not aiming for any balance to anything when he's appointing ex-oil CEOs as chief diplomats and EPA haters to head up the agencies.

That article detailed a few of the moves that are getting challenged in courts. But you can only tie up so many things if everyone with any power is pushing for these moves.

Perhaps it will take a return to flaming rivers, seeing Great Lakes uninhabitable or more Flints for people to realize we need a balance.

 
I put a post in "trump's America" that dudeguyy talked about in post #3.

I put it in Trump's America because there are a lot of other things there that don't necessarily connect to the environment topic of this thread.

 
I don't know if I needed a new topic for this but I've just been really frustrated about it lately. I want to sit down with Republicans (the kind that don't use catch phrases and say "Trump won get over it" as if this is a sport and anything that's negative for the country is irrelevant because he's their mascot) and have a conversation with them about it.

I understand the Pro-lifers' point of view, but I don't understand any of them who are staunchly in support of Trump for any other reason, and this is one of the things I just can't fathom any sane person agreeing with.

 
Moiraine said:
All regulations hamper businesses, but they do so in order to protect the public. There are some that are probably stupid but I'm assuming most should be there.

The reason regulations have to exist is because there are too many businesses that can't be trusted not to harm the general public. These businesses have no regard for anything except $. People have died because of companies who only saw profits and nothing else. $ is not more important than keeping people safe.
Click to expand...
I concur. This notion that too many Republicans have, that the "free market" will police corporations to ensure they do the right thing is absolutely a ludicrous sham.

Businesses will ALWAYS put their profits ahead of protecting the environment, their employees safety, and general civic responsibility.

It's bizarre. It's almost as if Republicans don't think that poisoning the air or water will affect them in any way.

 
Here's your way to talk to them - ask your questions, make your points.

Three R's have put a bill (#HR:861) up in the House to dismantle the EPA. If you want to reach out to sponsors directly: Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Steven Palazzo (R-MS). Phone and offices addresses can be found at www.govtrack.us -

This goes through the committee chairs of four divisions first before the full house - so if you want to reach out to them as well to urge them to vote no on HR861 so that it never makes it out of the House reach out to: Bill Shuster, Lamar Smith, Greg Walden & Michael Conaway. Let's keep this from getting further consideration.

You are better off calling their Washington offices and explaining you're not a constituent, but instead calling with respect to their role on the review of HR861and that you want to express your disgust at the consideration. Please vote NO on dismantling the EPA.

 
Back
Top