- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2015 clean water rule finally being rescinded
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:44 pm
LINK
What are the odds the new clean water rule is proposed and up for public comment before the next election cycle? For a rule that never went to effect it's kind of silly that people are making a big deal out of it.
Especially considering that the rule did not expand jurisdiction and it may actually have increased the scope of the farm/agricultural exemptions.
So basically nothing changed.. environmental activists are freaking out over sensationalist headlines and Trumpkins are celebrating the status quo remaining the exact same
What are the odds the new clean water rule is proposed and up for public comment before the next election cycle? For a rule that never went to effect it's kind of silly that people are making a big deal out of it.
Especially considering that the rule did not expand jurisdiction and it may actually have increased the scope of the farm/agricultural exemptions.
So basically nothing changed.. environmental activists are freaking out over sensationalist headlines and Trumpkins are celebrating the status quo remaining the exact same
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 8:48 pm
2
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:46 pm to bmy
quote:
"We are taking significant action to return power to the states and provide regulatory certainty to our nation's farmers and businesses," EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt said.
MAGA
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:50 pm to texag7
quote:
MAGA
By rescinding a rule that never went into effect?
And Pruitt just created more regulatory uncertainty.. not less. Now a new rule will be developed.. and probably not until the next election cycle is over. It has to be based on science and many years of USSC decisions/precedent.
It's going to be the best public comment period we will probably ever see btw. It will be hilarious.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 8:52 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:50 pm to texag7
quote:and this is bad, is that correct?
The Clean Water Act protects major water bodies like large streams, rivers, bays and other coastal waters, along with streams and wetlands that flow into them from being destroyed or polluted—or, at least, not polluted without federal oversight.
It covers a large range of pollutants, including sewage, garbage, biological and radioactive materials, and industrial and agricultural waste.
The 2015 Clean Water Rule clarified that federal agencies could also regulate certain types of smaller or more isolated waters, like seasonal streams and wetlands near them, which have a less obvious connection to larger waters.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 8:52 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:53 pm to MastrShake
quote:
and this is bad, is that correct?
Yes the federal government has zero business regulating everything in existence.
States rights
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:57 pm to texag7
quote:so if i own a company that pours ink into lake tahoe, the guvment should jus git off ma back!
Yes the federal government has zero business regulating everything in existence.
quote:what state has the rights to the Mississippi river? or the Gulf of Mexico?
States rights
do you see why this is a federal matter yet?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 8:59 pm to texag7
quote:
Kamala Harris @SenKamalaHarris
Eliminating the Clean Water rule is an attack on our fundamental right to drink clean water.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:00 pm to MastrShake
quote:
The 2015 Clean Water Rule clarified that federal agencies could also regulate certain types of smaller or more isolated waters, like seasonal streams and wetlands near them, which have a less obvious connection to larger waters.
This isn't true. Those water features are and were considered jurisdictional prior to the 2015 clean water rule.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:00 pm to MastrShake
quote:
so if i own a company that pours ink into lake tahoe, the guvment should jus git off ma back!
No?
I'm actually going to stop replying to your stupid arse though. You took states rights and started moaning about ink
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:07 pm to MastrShake
quote:
what state has the rights to the Mississippi river? or the Gulf of Mexico?
do you see why this is a federal matter yet?
The regulatory issue and debate is about smaller streams and wetlands. Not about the Mississippi. Reality is that pollutants travel through these smaller waters and degrade the quality of those larger waterbodies.
I'm all for states having a larger ability to regulate their natural resources but we also need a federal standard to be set.. the federal standard acts as a buffer for the state's regulations and protects waters nationwide from corrupt lobbyists and crony capitalists.
There is very little support in southern states for environmental regulations.. and if you enjoy the outdoors it's worth taking seriously.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 9:10 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:08 pm to bmy
No matter what Trump does, it will always be met with backlash. Republicans were guilty of this under Obama at times. It's reactionary politics sans logic. The populous and government are devolving, and that's the point, drive it to the point of total dysfunction.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 9:09 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:11 pm to AUsteriskPride
quote:
No matter what Trump does, it will always be met with backlash. Republicans were guilty of this under Obama at times. It's reactionary politics sans logic. The populous and government are devolving, and that's the point, drive it to the point of total dysfunction
I moved to Alabama in elementary school.. and politics in 2017 reminds me of this terrible choice I had to make in like 3rd grade..
Do I choose the orange jello cup with blue whipped cream or the crimson and white jello cup? Choose carefully because you are stuck with that jello no matter what.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 9:12 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:15 pm to bmy
Crimson...easy choice.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 9:22 pm to texag7
quote:in other words, "i have no rebuttal and heres an emoticon because im too dumb to express thoughts with words".
I'm actually going to stop replying to your stupid arse though. You took states rights and started moaning about ink
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:44 pm to MastrShake
quote:
in other words, "i have no rebuttal and heres an emoticon because im too dumb to express thoughts with words".
i addressed it.. because you're missing the point.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:47 pm to MastrShake
quote:
so if i own a company that pours ink into lake tahoe, the guvment should jus git off ma back!
A smarter company might look into selling the ink? Why would any company just do this at random?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:48 pm to bmy
quote:
There is very little support in southern states for over burdensome and minimally effective environmental regulations.. those that enjoy the outdoors take it seriously.
FIFY..The environment in the US is improving. You just hate good paying jobs created by industry and a robust economy that supports families and allows for folks of all socioeconmic backgrounds to achieve the American dream. So, you fear monger... keep the poor bound in poverty.. keep dem votes.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 10:50 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:08 pm to geauxturbo
quote:
FIFY..The environment in the US is improving. You just hate good paying jobs created by industry and a robust economy that supports families and allows for folks of all socioeconmic backgrounds to achieve the American dream. So, you fear monger... keep the poor bound in poverty.. keep dem votes.
No. I don't think it's okay for people to pollute or degrade without an actual economic return. Developer Joe can't spend half of 1% of his net profit (not total costs) on doing his part to keep the water clean? That isn't reasonable? It's not hard to have a clean environment AND a robust economy.
People don't cause environmental degradation or pollute because they are greedy, cheap, malicious, etc. They pollute and degrade the environment because they are lazy and ignorant.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 11:38 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News