# What's wrong with the EPA? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 28, 2017, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414 "2017-01-28T18:40:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![nate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nate/32/13085_2.png) [@nate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nate)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/1 "2017-01-28T18:40:37Z")
It would be hard not to notice the right’s disdain for the EPA and I want to know why. Is there any logical, factual evidence that the EPA is corrupt or not making policies based on evidence? Of all of Trump’s EOs, the one forcing political filtering of EPA (et al) findings is the most disturbing. I’d like to think I’m just unaware of all of the terrible things the EPA is doing and maybe this is a good thing, but I just can’t connect the dots. I seriously doubt the free market can address the types of problems the EPA studies due to the tragedy of the commons theory, so I believe the function of the EPA is an essential part of our gov’t. It infuriates me when my conservative co-workers say that we should shut the EPA down… like somehow they are going to benefit from that. It’s insane. Look at industrial countries without environmental regulations, do they really envy that? Do they really want to be like China or India? At least China is now paying lip service to the environment, not poo-pooing it in the name of cheaper goods. It’s hard to get regulations in place and enforced, but really quick and easy to get rid of them. It’s hard to build something but easy to destroy it, and I fear that even if the left gets back into power that we’ll get back to where we are now, and that’s scary. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/2 "2017-01-28T18:45:19Z")
The GOP thinks the EPA is blowing smoke. 😃 It comes down to two words: Business profits. ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/3 "2017-01-28T18:49:35Z")
1.) They believe that anything that can make a profit/provide jobs is a good thing 2.) They believe that the Earth was built by God specifically for the use of humans, and the rapture is coming soon anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Manhole\_Eunuchsbane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/59ef9b/32.png) [@Manhole\_Eunuchsbane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manhole_Eunuchsbane)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/4 "2017-01-28T18:50:53Z")
The GOP is traditionally the party of business. The defender of corporations against government regulation. One of the primary functions of the EPA traditionally has been to attempt to determine acceptable levels of pollution, waste, and environmental impact that certain businesses generate, and to decide how financially responsible those businesses are for any damage that they do. These regulations can be expensive and time consuming for these corporations to comply with. So in a TL/DR nutshell, Conservatives (in a general sense) have traditionally been champions of capitalism and corporatism over environmental concerns. They often equate the EPA with a tree-hugging, liberal sort of ideal which stands in the way of economic expansion. To be fair, it can be at times. ---
**Author:** ![ZebraShaSha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/eada6e/32.png) [@ZebraShaSha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZebraShaSha)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/5 "2017-01-28T18:52:50Z")
The EPA puts regulations on industry, which costs them money. Republicans represent industry and are greedy assholes. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/6 "2017-01-28T18:53:01Z")
Before going forward in assuming that the current Republican party is normal, we should check on the Republicans that did manage it early: [http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/151871-former-epa-heads-under-republican-presidents-defend-agency-against-attacks](http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/151871-former-epa-heads-under-republican-presidents-defend-agency-against-attacks) > [@](#): > > Two former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrators who served under Republican presidents are decrying efforts in Congress to limit the agency’s authority. > > In an op-ed in the Washington Post published online late Thursday, William Ruckelshaus and Christine Todd Whitman said the EPA is “under siege.” > > “Today the agency President Richard Nixon created in response to the public outcry over visible air pollution and flammable rivers is under siege,” said Ruckelshaus, who served as EPA administrator under Presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, and Whitman, who headed the agency under President George W. Bush. > > Ruckelshaus and Whitman argue the EPA should be protected from efforts in Congress to eliminate its regulatory authority and slash its budget. And they say the agency has significantly improved public health and the environment. > > “Amid the virulent attacks on the EPA driven by concern about overregulation, it is easy to forget how far we have come in the past 40 years,” they say. “We should take heart from all this progress and not, as some in Congress have suggested, seek to tear down the agency that the president and Congress created to protect America’s health and environment.” > > At the same time, Ruckelshaus and Whitman bash calls to abolish or slash the EPA budget. ---
**Author:** ![Manhole\_Eunuchsbane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/59ef9b/32.png) [@Manhole\_Eunuchsbane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manhole_Eunuchsbane)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/7 "2017-01-28T18:56:46Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Before going forward in assuming that the current Republican party is normal, we should check on the Republicans that did manage it early: > > [http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/151871-former-epa-heads-under-republican-presidents-defend-agency-against-attacks](http://origin-nyi.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/151871-former-epa-heads-under-republican-presidents-defend-agency-against-attacks) That’s a really good point. The tact that the Trump administration has taken towards the EPA is a magnitude of order more hostile than any other Republican administration has been up to this point. As the link that GIGObuster posted notes, it was the Nixon administration (a Republican administration) that founded the agency. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/8 "2017-01-28T18:58:17Z")
> [@](#): > > It would be hard not to notice the right’s disdain for the EPA and I want to know why. Is there any logical, factual evidence that the EPA is corrupt or not making policies based on evidence? It stifles business and puts US companies at an economic disadvantage compared to countries without an EPA. Some folks don’t agree that it’s worth it to have a cleaner environment when it costs jobs and profits. In addition, a lot of folks on the right feel that the whole climate change thing is a hoax and basically just the left wing eco types finally finding an issue they can stick it to business over…and that the EPA has assisted them in doing so. > [@](#): > > Of all of Trump’s EOs, the one forcing political filtering of EPA (et al) findings is the most disturbing. I’d like to think I’m just unaware of all of the terrible things the EPA is doing and maybe this is a good thing, but I just can’t connect the dots. It’s basically because you have a different world view than those who are making the claims. You feel that having a safe and healthy environment is worth the costs in terms of jobs and profits and probably feel that since the vast majority of experts in the field of climate science are sure that global climate change is happening and it’s root cause is mainly human in origin and that it’s not a vast left wing eco nut conspiracy to make us all go back to hunting and gathering. > [@](#): > > Look at industrial countries without environmental regulations, do they really envy that? Do they really want to be like China or India? Both have environmental regulations btw. The real differences is that they aren’t enforced, since in the case of the CCP they can pretty much decide what is or isn’t enforced by fiat. On the books, however, China has some very tough regulations. > [@](#): > > At least China is now paying lip service to the environment, not poo-pooing it in the name of cheaper goods. Their environmental disasters are becoming so overwhelming that even the CCP has to pay attention and at least look like they are trying to do something. Mainly, though, the CCPs initiatives are doing things like censorship in China and on Chinese (state controlled) social media, attempting to stifle or deflect knowledge of how bad it is externally, moving the bar for polution counters so it doesn’t alert until it hits a higher mark, claiming the smog is really just fog so it isn’t a problem, etc etc. IOW, it’s more than lip service but a lot of it is just damage control or simply censorship. That said, they almost HAVE to start doing something on this as it’s a major problem in China. I know less about India so maybe someone can chime in on that. I was in India in the 90’s working on building network infrastructure there ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/9 "2017-01-28T20:35:09Z")
Just to offer an alternative as to why individuals may hate the EPA. There is a perception that the EPA deals with issues unfairly. In some cases this could be justified and in others not. Large companies often have the money to work within the EPA’s restrictions or the political capital to carve out exceptions for themselves. This creates situations where an individual may perceive the EPA as working against them. ‘I wanted to build a house on my property but the EPA said no it’s wetland so I sold it for pennies on the dollar. Then Walmart bought the property and put it in a giant box store hows that fair’ ---
**Author:** ![Twoflower](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/twoflower/32/22_2.png) [@Twoflower](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Twoflower)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/10 "2017-01-28T20:43:20Z")
> [@boytyperanma](#): > > Just to offer an alternative as to why individuals may hate the EPA. > > There is a perception that the EPA deals with issues unfairly. In some cases this could be justified and in others not. > > Large companies often have the money to work within the EPA’s restrictions or the political capital to carve out exceptions for themselves. This creates situations where an individual may perceive the EPA as working against them. > > ‘I wanted to build a house on my property but the EPA said no it’s wetland so I sold it for pennies on the dollar. Then Walmart bought the property and put it in a giant box store hows that fair’ Perfect example for how the EPA is unfairly scapegoated for general hatred of environmental regulations. The EPA doesn’t regulate wetlands, the Army Corps of Engineers does. And if Walmart built in a wetland, they paid a whole lot of money in permitting and mitigation costs - far more than would be worth the trouble for a homeowner. ---
**Author:** ![purplehearingaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7bcc69/32.png) [@purplehearingaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/purplehearingaid)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/11 "2017-01-28T20:47:41Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > The GOP thinks the EPA is blowing smoke. > 😃 > > It comes down to two words: Business profits. You got that right ! It cost money to have your business be environmental friendly and if you get catch for breaking environmental laws it going to cost you big $$$! It’s a lot easier and cheaper for a factory to dump it hazard waste into the river or any body of water , this happen in a town near me . I happen to like having clear air to be breathe and water to drink . ---
**Author:** ![nate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nate/32/13085_2.png) [@nate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nate)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/12 "2017-01-28T21:13:06Z")
Does anyone have any specific verified examples of the EPA kowtowing to big industry? Carving out exceptions or prefered treatment to them? Basically corruption? Does anyone have examples of EPA regulations that actually are ridiculous? My fox-news obsessed dad has always complained about how he can’t use effective grass-safe weed killer on his lawn due to those damn EPA regulations. Like they exist just to make his fight against weeds harder. I usually tell him I don’t know why it’s banned, but maybe they had proof that runoff caused environmental impact in streams and rivers, or maybe the chemicals caused cancer in mice or something, but I believe they probably had good reason to ban it. He thinks it probably negatively affected some insignificant bug or some rare minnow and now no one can use it due to some bleeding heart libs personal belief. ---
**Author:** ![Manhole\_Eunuchsbane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/59ef9b/32.png) [@Manhole\_Eunuchsbane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Manhole_Eunuchsbane)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/13 "2017-01-28T21:31:14Z")
> [@nate](#): > > Does anyone have any specific verified examples of the EPA kowtowing to big industry? Carving out exceptions or prefered treatment to them? Basically corruption? Does anyone have examples of EPA regulations that actually are ridiculous? > > My fox-news obsessed dad has always complained about how he can’t use effective grass-safe weed killer on his lawn due to those damn EPA regulations. Like they exist just to make his fight against weeds harder. I usually tell him I don’t know why it’s banned, but maybe they had proof that runoff caused environmental impact in streams and rivers, or maybe the chemicals caused cancer in mice or something, but I believe they probably had good reason to ban it. He thinks it probably negatively affected some insignificant bug or some rare minnow and now no one can use it due to some bleeding heart libs personal belief. A quick Google search mostly reveals corruption of a political or partisan sort. Things like holding up new regulations until after an election (so as to avoid negatively affecting the chances of an incumbent) or using public funds to send out lobbying materiel to various environmental groups. There was a early email scandal involving Carol Browner, a former head of the EPA who purportedly destroyed many electronic files that she had no business deleting. All fairly minor, seemingly rather partisan complaints, methinks. [http://www.westernjournalism.com/exposed-environmental-corruption-agency/](http://www.westernjournalism.com/exposed-environmental-corruption-agency/) ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/14 "2017-01-28T21:35:26Z")
> [@nate](#): > > It would be hard not to notice the right’s disdain for the EPA and I want to know why. Is there any logical, factual evidence that the EPA is corrupt or not making policies based on evidence? Here are some articles from the right, explaining their view of the EPA: [http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trump-jobs-and-the-rogue-epa/](http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/trump-jobs-and-the-rogue-epa/) [http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2013/03/14/the-epa-the-worst-of-many-rogue-federal-agencies/#1731df735beb](http://www.forbes.com/sites/markhendrickson/2013/03/14/the-epa-the-worst-of-many-rogue-federal-agencies/#1731df735beb) Among the crimes committed by the EPA: “The Environmental Protection Agency engaged in ‘covert propaganda’ and violated federal law when it blitzed social media to urge the public to back an Obama administration rule intended to better protect the nation’s streams and surface waters.” - New York Times, 12/14/2015 In [Michigan et. al. vs EPA](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/14-46_10n2.pdf), the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA had illegally refused to consider the cost of regulations while making decisions. The EPA attempted a massive power grab by expanding its own authority under the Clean Water Act. The CWA gives the EPA power to regulate runoff into lakes and rivers. The EPA tried to expand its authority from what is actually in the law and give itself authority over things like small ponds, streams, and ditches. [27 states fought back in court.](http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/246539-27-states-challenge-obama-water-rule-in-court) They won, with the court ruling that the EPA’s action was not justified. Other environmental regulations from other agencies involve illegal government overreach as well. For example, the Fish & wildlife Service has tried to classify species as endangered, which are not actually endangered. This could be used to give the government power over large areas of land, shutting down drilling, mining, and ranching on those areas. [That’s been knocked down in court as well.](http://www.nationalreview.com/article/373810/sue-and-settle-racket-stephen-moore) So in summary, federal environmental regulators have broken the law many times. Some people are upset about this because they believe that the government should obey the law. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2017, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/15 "2017-01-28T23:39:15Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Among the crimes committed by the EPA: > > “The Environmental Protection Agency engaged in ‘covert propaganda’ and violated federal law when it blitzed social media to urge the public to back an Obama administration rule intended to better protect the nation’s streams and surface waters.” - New York Times, 12/14/2015 Well, one way to deal with a Gish gallop is just to see if the first example is as bad as claimed. > [@](#): > > EPA officials insist they did nothing wrong, and that the agency has a right to promote its policies publicly. The New York Times reports the amount of money spent on the campaign was probably trivial, and the likely punishment would be a simple acknowledgment that a mistake was made. Still, it will give more fodder to Republican opponents of the Waters of the U.S. rule as they push to block it as part of a larger government spending bill this week. As reported days after and by the NYT “the G.A.O.’s findings are unlikely to lead to civil or criminal penalties.” As Steve Benen at MSNBC noted: > **[EPA 'propaganda' isn't quite as dramatic as advertised](https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/epa-propaganda-isnt-quite-dramatic-advertised-msna755346)** > > The headlines said the EPA was caught relying on "covert propaganda." The truth is far less scandalous. > [@](#): > > I’m strongly of the opinion that covert government propaganda must be avoided, but the allegations here are pretty thin. The EPA created a social-media message, it disseminated that message, and it made no effort whatsoever to hide its authorship of the message. > > The investigation’s findings even noted that the content was “visibly attributed to EPA, as it displayed the agency’s profile photo and, under the title, ‘by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.’” Here’s the original page the public was directed to – and take note of the EPA logo in the middle. > > So what’s the catch? Apparently, investigators at the Government Accountability Office determined that as the EPA’s message worked its way around the Internet, it might not have been entirely clear that the EPA created the message. > > Ergo, there was a potential for “covert propaganda.” These are the “extreme lengths” about which Inhofe was so eager to complain. > > Look, media sock-puppetry must be avoided, regardless of administration. And when the Bush/Cheney team used taxpayer money to pay pundits to publicly praise the administration’s agenda, that was a real controversy. > > This EPA story, however, is something else entirely, and it seems quite trivial by comparison. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2017, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/16 "2017-01-29T02:01:10Z")
> [@ZebraShaSha](#): > > The EPA puts regulations on industry, which costs them money. Republicans represent industry and are greedy assholes. :rolleyes: Nice rewrite of history. The EPA was created by a Republican (Nixon). Recently Obama used it as a sound-bite hand grenade on his way out the door to generate knee-jerk reactions like this thread. He should have to pay for any financial damage he caused. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2017, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/17 "2017-01-29T02:05:17Z")
I’m surprised no one has mentioned the Animus River spill yet ---
**Author:** ![nate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nate/32/13085_2.png) [@nate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nate)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2017, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/18 "2017-01-29T02:20:25Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m surprised no one has mentioned the Animus River spill yet It was a disaster by incompetence or laziness or underfunding for sure. But not nefarious. Mistakes, even huge mistakes happen and should be appropriately handled, but that doesn’t mean the EPA overall is not a net positive for the country. I mean, we wouldn’t scrap the military if they accidentally bombed a hospital full of civilians because we expect the occasional disaster to happen. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/19 "2017-02-01T00:10:27Z")
Yes, because an agency isn’t doing its job well enough, we should give them even LESS money, as if that will somehow make them improve. ---
**Author:** ![chacoguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/50afbb/32.png) [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2017, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414/20 "2017-02-01T05:41:19Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m surprised no one has mentioned the Animus River spill yet > [@nate](#): > > It was a disaster by incompetence or laziness or underfunding for sure. But not nefarious. Mistakes, even huge mistakes happen and should be appropriately handled, but that doesn’t mean the EPA overall is not a net positive for the country. I mean, we wouldn’t scrap the military if they accidentally bombed a hospital full of civilians because we expect the occasional disaster to happen. [That shit was intentional.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBlR05tDCbI&t=99s) [Go to the 39 minute mark.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mimyO9k1O6c) [Now, here we are.](http://www.waterworld.com/articles/2017/01/epa-denies-claims-in-gold-king-mine-spill.html) [LINK](http://www.denverpost.com/2015/10/22/review-gold-king-mine-spill-was-preventable-disaster-potential-not-understood/) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-the-epa/778414.md?page=2)