Start A Petition

House Votes to Block EPA on Water Pollution


Environment  (tags: animals, climate-change, conservation, ecosystems, environment, healthconditions, pollution, protection, water )

Kit
- 2928 days ago - politico.com
Just when ya think the Congress can't sink any lower, they do!



   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Kit B (276)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 9:16 am


The bill is one of several recent House efforts to limit the Obama administration’s water pollution policies, including a series of riders attached to the fiscal 2012 Interior-EPA spending bill.

Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.), the ranking member on the transportation panel and co-author of the bill, accused EPA of “strong-arming the states” on water permits and of creating an “atmosphere of worry, of distrust and of bitterness.”

Most Democrats, meanwhile, accused supporters of the bill of caving to corporate interests and putting water quality and the environment at risk. Democrats offered several amendments aimed at restoring some of the EPA’s authority under the bill, but they were easily defeated by the Republican majority.

“Let’s not fool ourselves, the bill before us today isn’t just about the role of federal government, the bill isn’t just a push for state sovereignty; rather, this bill would satisfy two very niche special interests at the cost of the American public,” said Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.). “This bill is designed to benefit mountaintop coal mining companies and large factory farms.”
************************************

Read more at Visit Site


 

Kit B (276)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 9:20 am

Oh my clean water might affect the profit margin for those corporations that pay the way for our fearful non-heros in Congress. Let them all drink dirty - non filtered water.

This anti just the republicans being twits this our Congress in action. Either they want to completely shut down the EPA, making excuses all the way or they spend their time arguing about light bulbs. What morons.
 

CherAway C (1424)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 9:35 am


Thnx for posting sweetie!

 

Eileen Novak (444)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 11:55 am
Not surprising. They must bow to their benefactors.
On something as basic and vital to all LIFE as water, one might assume that morality would trump greed, but no.
Fire the lot of 'em.
 

patricia lasek (317)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 12:05 pm
Let them drink oil!
 

Thomas H (37)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 12:10 pm
Yeah, from the Yellowstone River. And all the other water bodies they detest enough to let their Corporate Masters pollute at will. The insanity is stunning.
 

Shelly Peterson (213)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 12:52 pm
Keep signing every petition you can find on this issue! I just received 2 more in hotmail, sinse the House pasted this....and one of the letters says that President O bama can and mostly veto, if it passes the Senate.....but still, the fact we even have to defend this, show how important it is to be aware, share and be pro-active.
 

SuS NoMail Plez P (244)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:03 pm
Thank you Kit. Pathetic!
 

SuS NoMail Plez P (244)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:05 pm
Excuse me for being so far behind, but I have not seen any petitions receintly. Would someone post links to any and all you have? Thank you very much.
 

Sheryl G (359)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:21 pm
Can't seem to get the article to open up for some reason. In any case, from what I can gather up top, they keep reaching new standards of low.
 

. (0)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:33 pm
there is so much slime at the bottom of "their" barrel that you wonder how they move! thanks, Kit for the post
 

Phil R (29)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:46 pm
I live within view of the Hudson River in New York. Before the EPA and DEC my river was a cesspool of industrial waste and human sewage. Large corporations like GE were pumping PCB into the water. Garbage was routinely dumped into it and local municipalities allowed sewage to flow into it untreated. Now, after some 30+ years of environmental regulation and clean-up the Hudson is finally beginning to recover. The water quality is 100% better than it was and continues to improve.

These Republican apologists for our worst polluters are nothing but advocates for greedy corporations that place profit above the welfare of the American people...they ought to be ashamed of themselves!
 

Phil R (29)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:51 pm
On an unrelated note. Am i the only one who's sick of these automated adds starting up every time i visit a Care2 page? Advertising is one thing...but this is truly annoying.
 

Kit B (276)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 1:59 pm

No Phil, you are not alone and though I do realize that Care2 is a for profit business in need of ads, these are just beyond annoying. I usually have Pandora on these ads break through that.
 

Kit B (276)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 2:06 pm

I was reading a copy of one of our Texas magazines in the doc's office yesterday and there was a picture of Santa Elena Canyon, a big deep white water area of the Big Bend - well it was a deep area. Now one can see the rocks on the river floor. We had better get smart very fast. All of life needs water and we have only about 1% of the planets water that is fresh water. That is of course massively polluted and getting worse.

Can desalinization be the answer? Not until we find a useful or practical way of disposing of the salt once removed from the water.
 

Terry King (113)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 3:59 pm
Madness and shortsighted stupidity!
 

LeMoyn Salmonsen (88)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 4:21 pm
Well the stock on bottled water and plastic bottles just shot up.
 

Kit B (276)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 4:24 pm

I have my own water filteration system and think we all should. Now what do we do when there is no longer that access to water from our pipes?

Terry is right. "shortsighted stupidity"
 

Monica D (580)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 6:18 pm
Saddened to hear of this dirty water bill.
 

SuS NoMail Plez P (244)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 6:43 pm
Yes Kit, EVERYONE should have their own H2o filteration system. The price point can accomidate everyone's financial situation. Anyone purchasing PLASTIC H2o bottles disgust me. THERE IS NO EXCUSE OR JUSTIFICATION in my opinion. It makes me so pis#$%ed off I go CRAZY.
Phil you nailed it with this comment:
..." our worst polluters are nothing but advocates for gr$$dy corporations that place profit above the welfare of the American people...they ought to be ashamed of themselves!
send green star | flag as inappropriateWhy is this inappropriate?

 

David C (75)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 7:55 pm
sick, sick, sick...fortunately we still have the Senate and President to push to stop this stupid dirty water bill...
wonder what the pols expect the citizens of this country to drink....
 

Susanne R (236)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 8:10 pm
The article states: "Most Democrats, meanwhile, accused supporters of the bill of caving to corporate interests and putting water quality and the environment at risk. Democrats offered several amendments aimed at restoring some of the EPA’s authority under the bill, but they were easily defeated by the Republican majority."

According to the Miami Herald: "Critics of the bill said it would have much broader implications. The EPA's role has been crucial, they argue, in the effort to clean up the Chesapeake Bay and to address the dead zone that blooms each year as runoff from Midwest farms flows down the Mississippi River into the Gulf of Mexico. Those pollution problems go beyond a single state."

Since the EPA is an agency of the federal government, and the federal government of the United States is the national government of the constitutional republic of fifty states that is the United States of America, how can Congress justify a bill that will benefit a handful of states to the detriment of others? When an industry located in a certain state contaminates a river, the contaminants don't remain at the state's border when the river flows beyond it.

Why in the world was the Environmental Protection Agency created if it's not allowed to do its job consistently and effectively? Surprisingly enough, the agency was proposed by Richard Nixon and began operating during his administration. What a chilling thought! TODAY'S REPUBLICANS MAKE RICHARD NIXON LOOK GOOD!

 

Kit B (276)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 8:22 pm

Well it is only water and we don't need no stinkin' water. Which actually is true - we do however, need clean water perferrably water that neither stinks nor ignites.
 

Ruth R (246)
Thursday July 14, 2011, 11:39 pm
Noted. The house is not making this good for the country. People have a list of who is voting which way and why.
 

Chris R (80)
Friday July 15, 2011, 5:27 am
Another feather in the Republicans hat, another step in destroying our environment and wildlife in the name of greed.
 

Esther Z (94)
Friday July 15, 2011, 8:08 am
The Repugs keep calling the EPA a power grabber and regulatory nightmare; well, actually they call any progressive agency, that was created to protect our evironment and the American people, ineffectual regulatory nightmares. Progressive means nightmarish in the Repug lexicon.
 

Rosie Lopez (73)
Friday July 15, 2011, 1:23 pm
infuriating!
 

Peter M. (0)
Friday July 15, 2011, 4:40 pm
In stead of repealing the Clean Water Act, members should hold EPA accountable for never having implemented the CWA, by correcting an essential water pollution test that caused the failure of the Act. EPA used this test incorrectly and as one of its many negative consequences, ignored 60% of the ‘oxygen exerting’ pollution in sewage and especially ignored all the pollution caused by nitrogenous (urine and protein) waste, while this waste not only exerts an oxygen demand, but also is a fertilizer for algae, contributing to eutrophication, resulting in dead zones. (www.petermaier.net)

In 1984 EPA officially acknowledged the problems with the test, but never corrected the test and in 1987, of the record, stated that the test and regulations should be corrected, but at the same time claiming that this would be impossible as it would require a re-education and retooling of an entire industry, happy with the status quo. The fact that EPA already in 1978 acknowledged that not only much better treatment was available, but also at much lower cost, may influence EPA’s refusal to even discuss this issue.

Since States and the entire water pollution industry have been aware of this and has done nothing to correct this, what do people expect will change if States take over the responsibility to clean up our open waters?

Although this ‘testing’ issue can be verified in an hour, nobody in the media seems to be willing to spend this time, instead they keep parroting what they are told by the EPA and State Agencies intended to hide this mistake. Unfortunately, when an issue is ignored by the media, so will it be ignored by politicians, who should hold EPA accountable for not having implemented the CWA, they authorized.
 

Roger Skinner (14)
Saturday July 16, 2011, 12:41 pm
Anyone see Rachel Maddow Friday night? If not, check out http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#43776782
That is what things were like before we had the EPA and the Clean Water Act. Not to even mention air pollution.
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)


Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in Environment





 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.