| | | >>>"Do you understand there is no alternative to a Democratic Environmental Protection Agency if you want to live in a clean country."<<<
Congress is not capable of determining which laws are necessary for environmental safe guards on its own? They should be able to do that.
Can an agency oversee and care for the environment in a protective manner? Can an agency help to establish sound policy backed by regulations that serve the public? It should be able to do that in theory. It is a good enough idea that the public supported the establishment of the EPA. Has the EPA honored the public trust? No? Who or what is to blame?
The problem which you don't seem to want to deal with is that we have created government which in turn has been allowed to run amok. The reality of mismanagement, waste, fraud, and rampant corruption enriching politically powerful constituencies seems to escape you and people like you entirely.
Has congress held the EPA accountable so that the public could rely on the EPA to be a credible and responsible service?
===============================================
>>> Congress often has helped the EPA squander the taxpayers’ money. It has passed more than 20 environmental laws directing the government to pay the legal fees of green groups that sue the government, even when the government-subsidized plaintiffs would lose. Guaranteed money for suing the government—what a deal! Forbes.com contributor Larry Bell recently detailed EPA’s cozy collusion with green groups, in which the two parties (who really are on the same side) negotiate settlements outside of the courtroom where they are shielded from scrutiny.
>>> EPA manager guilty on ten charges of fraud The Justice Department has recently brought up ten charges on a former EPA project manager, Gordon McDonald. McDonald was initially responsible for cleaning up two New Jersey superfund sites, the Diamond Alkali in Newark and the Federal Creosote in Manville.
An EPA superfund site is set up when an environment is declared a hazardous waste site. The superfund cleanup is funded through taxes on petroleum and chemical industries, an environmental tax on corporations and other general tax revenues, including trust funds and hazardous waste superfunds.
After seven years of managing the sites, between 2000 and 2007, McDonald was investigated for laundering money and blowing taxpayer dollars, while he received kickbacks on the side. McDonald rigged bids, accepted kickbacks from subcontractors and awarded insiders with big money payoffs.
A New Jersey jury has returned guilty verdicts on all ten charges that were filed back in 2009. The kickbacks that McDonald received totaled over 1.5 million dollars. The convictions also revolve around a network of eight other individuals, including three companies who have pleaded guilty for co-conspiring.
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/042387_EPA_corrupt_officials_money_laundering.html#ixzz4SSZifIc9
>>>Set up to clean up contaminated sites, Superfund consumed over 40 percent of the EPA’s budget at one point. Sadly, most of the money went to lawyers, and the program itself ended up demonstrating its “essential irrelevance to public health."
>>> the EPA suppressed the findings of a decade-long, half-billion-dollar study of acid rain—NAPAP, the main scientific conclusion of which was that acid rain was not the culprit in increasing the acidity of lakes—until after Congress passed Clean Air Act of 1990. By enacting legislation premised on incomplete and incorrect science, unnecessary regulatory stringency cost Americans untold billions of dollars. So egregious was the EPA's conduct in this matter that Kay H. Jones, the senior scientist on the Council on Environmental Quality under three presidents, issued a report condemning the EPA cover-up and accusing the agency of “blatant public misinformation.”
>>>In the early ‘90s, Congressman John Dingell (D-Mich.) pulled no punches in insisting that certain environmental health regulations were based on the work of a scientist who “cooked the books” and performed “criminally fraudulent work.” On another occasion (in 1993) Dingell had this to say about the EPA's treatment of scientific research: “It cooks the books with great vigor.” |
|
