EPA: Environmental Protection Abuse

With the well-being of future generations in mind, environmental concerns have begun to establish a permanent residence atop the priority ladder for a vast array of Americans. Consequently, writers and political pundits alike are seizing this opportunity to capitalize on advocating their stance on the issue. Information, representing all positions, pours in at an unrelenting and unfathomable rate. For the average American it can be an arduous process sifting through all the rhetoric in attempt to find the real truth regarding our impact as humans on the environment; one such example is Susan Brown’s article The EPA’s Mercury Problem. In this article Brown attempts to expose hypocrisy among progressives by paralleling the Environmental Protection

In Jan. 2011, the EPA decided to veto the dumping of waste from the Spruce No. 1 Mine. But the agency’s efforts have so far been rebuffed by the courts as an overreach: Under the weird legal regime that governs mining, it’s the Army Corps of Engineers, not the EPA, which has the ultimate say-so over those permits. In 2012, the D.C. district court ruled that EPA lacked authority to veto the permit after the Corps had issued it. However, in fact EPA's decision is based on evidence from scientific research on serious environmental harm from mining. In May 2013, a coalition of Appalachian and environmental groups petitioned the EPA to set a numeric water quality standard under the Clean Water Act to protect streams from pollution caused by mountaintop removal mining . They claimed that “State politics and industry pressure have so far failed to end this pollution without such a standard and more and more streams and communities who rely on those waters are left vulnerable. We need EPA to act now.” The EPA’s authority over the Clean Water Act in respect to Spruce Mine No. 1 was finally affirmed by the Supreme Court in March 2014.

The national or federal environmental administration asks their states to help maintain a safe and clean environment for all of its’ people to enjoy. The National Environmental Policy Act or also known as NEPA was established in 1969 to aid federal agencies to help convey the message for the need to protect the environment. “Federal agencies are required to systematically assess the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and consider alternative ways of accomplishing their missions, which are less damaging to and protective of the environment” (U.S. General Services Administration). Even though the National Environmental Policy Act “requires” federal agencies to ensure states to follow through, Texas has not fully committed to the requirement. “Texas contains an abundance of natural resources, but efforts to impost environmental regulations have faced roadblocks for many decades” (The Texas Tribune). Texas has neglected to keep the environment’s safety in mind and thought of only the business boom. The natural resources found on the land of Texas represents a magnet that attracts people. Texas desires to continue the attraction of people into the state as it is allowing the state to flourish in economic matters. During the past few decades, “From 1970 and 1980, as oil prices spiraled upward and people flocked to Texas,” (Petersen and Assanie) there has been little attempt made in conserving

Recently, a contractor working for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unintentionally released 3 million gallons of toxic mine waste into the Animas River in the Mountain West state of Colorado. Right now, people in the US are debating the efficacy of the EPA (the right-wing is using the spill as anti-government propaganda) and the noxious aftermath the spill will undoubtedly have on local economies, communities and ecosystems.

The inception of U.S. Environmental policy most notably began under the Presidency of Richard Nixon; Nixon oversaw the passage of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and the creation of the Environmental Policy Act (EPA). The Clean Water Act of 1972, in particular, enacted stringent laws to prevent pollutants from entering navigable waters, outlawing open sewers from dumping crud into a local stream and the law also protects land that filters and purifies water as it flows by. The Landmark law passed in 1972, however, has not impeded the pending water crisis facing the U.S. today. The United States must take immediate measures in order to combat the problem; given that the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence now ranks water scarcity as a major threat to national security; right next to Terrorism (Sullivan). The United States should reform the Clean Water Act of 1972 to look for any deficiencies in the law.

Recently, a contractor working for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unintentionally released 3 million gallons of toxic mine waste into the Animas River in the Mountain West state of Colorado. Today, people in the US are debating the efficacy of the EPA (the right-wing is using the spill as anti-government propaganda) and the toxic aftermath the spill will undoubtedly have on local economies, communities and ecosystems. So far, the spill has "contaminated the Animas River, San Juan River, and the Colorado River in Utah."

Although many prominent politicians within the Republican Party continue to deny its’ existence, Climate Change is real. Irrefutable scientific evidence proves the earth is facing a serious environmental crisis, and the American public is taking notice. According to the EPA, 61% of Americans recognize the current status of the environment as an issue and believe action must be taken. Take action by voicing your disapproval for HR 5078, which passed in the House this past week. Encourage the Senate to kill this bill and protect America’s lakes, streams, wetlands, and other bodies of water. HR 5078 would prevent the “Definition of Waters of the United States Under the Clean Water Act” or WOTUS, a rule jointly proposed by the EPA and USACE,

Over the past decade a concern for protecting and preserving the environment has developed amongst United States citizens. Citizens have been promoting clean air, clean water, and clean land. Clean air means protecting the public from airborne contaminants known to be hazardous to human health. The Clean Air Act of 1970 is a law designed to control air pollution on a national level. It requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop and enforce regulations in order to protect the people (Environmental Protection Agency 2013). Clean water is water which is safe enough to be consumed by humans or used with low risk of harm. The Clean Water Act of 1972 was developed to restore and maintain the chemical, physical,

In the 1970’s there was growing confusion regarding environmental policy due to certain states creating environmental protection laws which were largely ineffective. To ease confusion, fix national guidelines, and monitor and enforce them President Richard Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA functions under three federal departments: the Interior, Agriculture, and Health, Education and Welfare departments. The original role of the EPA was to administrate the Clean Air Act which was enacted to reduce the air pollution caused by vehicles and industry. The EPA has since grown to enforce at least 12 major statutes such as: ocean dumping laws, safe drinking water, insecticides, and asbestos hazards in

Since President Trump’s appointment of the new head of the US Environmental Protection Agency, American citizens have felt safe and secure knowing that a well-versed environmentalist is watching over the degradation of their planet. Scott Pruitt, the new head, is the most qualified republican lawyer that deserves this job. His past attempts to repeatedly sue the EPA, his anti-environmental protection stance, and his alliance with gas and oil companies make Pruitt an ideal candidate for this position. As the new EPA chief, Pruitt is already making clean, green decisions to ensure the safety and protection of the earth.

With Republican President, Donald Trump, and the Republican Party holding the majority of both chambers of the 115th Congress, passing environmental protection legislation doesn’t seem to be a priority (or even a thought). Not only are Congress and the President ignoring environmental protection, but they have also worked together to reverse current environmental protection regulations. Normally, repealing any form of legislation is a lengthy and challenging task. However, during the spring of 2017, the Legislative and Executive branches were able to quickly and easily get rid of two environmental protection rules. This ease of change definitively had do with the legislation being bureaucratic agency rules and laws. Though, not only were

In the United States, These past few years have been rocky with the Environmental Protection Agency otherwise known as the EPA. The “rockiness” stems from multiple factors, particularly surrounding around President Donald Trump’s bias towards business over the protection of the environment.

The Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1970 to help provide solutions to the environmental issues and problems that need to be addressed. The name of the agency tells us that they are here to protect the environment and hold those who would harm our earth responsible for their actions. Unfortunately, the very agency that has been tasked with our protection has now become the perpetrator of an environmental disaster in Colorado. Last week, the EPA accidently dumped over three million gallons of toxic waste into Animus River (Kinkaid, 2015). It would appear that the good guys in white hats have turned their hats in for a new color that bad guys are associated with in the movies (black hats). The Fox news article by Kinkaid is an opinion

(Cheeseman2013) In the case of West Michigan Environmental Action Council, Inc. v. Natural Resources Commission. In the state of Michigan there was over 57000 acres that was located in the Pigeon River County State Forest. Shell oil would apply with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, for permits to drill ten exploratory wells in the forest. Roads had to be constructed to get to the different sites. The West Michigan Environmental Action claimed the roads would affect the elk’s habitat. The herds would avoid the roads even when there was no traffic on them. West Michigan Environmental Action council would go on to sue the Department of Natural Resources. It Citied it would have significant damage to the only elk herd east of the

For years, the government has been regulating citizens and subsidizing companies that they like. Each time they restrict or support a company, they hurt the free market, which then hurts the economy and like a Rube Goldberg machine the entire country is affected. The most common and harmful regulations are those set by the environmental protection agency (EPA). The EPA tries to stop natural selection and save animals through human intervention. Nearly all of the regulations have an effect on how everyone goes about their day. For example, in California the EPA saved a small fish with a minuscule population by pumping 71 billion gallons of fresh water into the ocean, this started one of the biggest droughts in California ever. The EPA