Whenever we put legislation to protect the environment, it fails. The EPA wants to ban coal. Ban coal. That's too much government. There is no problem in the environment. There love to teach this delusion. EPA also wants "green" vehicles. Those are expensive. Not everyone can afford a vehicle like that. The EPA is unconstitutional.
EPA= Evil Protection Agency. EPA= Too.Much. Spending.
While the need for clean air and water is of course vital to our success, so is limited government. Instead of actually protecting the environment we have people who are left wing activists running a program that stifles job growth and harms the individual citizen. It should be abolished and reestablished with strict guidelines of operation, to protect individual liberties and economic success.
Let’s get down to basics with people that will use logic and common sense. The EPA is way out of control. Back Trump as he cleans house in The EPA. The EPA will spew lies through the fake mainstream media.
It is the same with the Public Education Program.
It is not easy to drain the swamp! People don't want to lose their cash cow.
The EPA masquerades as a protector of the environment. It's existence implies that human beings in general can't police themselves to protect the environment. This is totally wrong. Companies will police themselves because it is in their best interests to put up a good image in order to attract the best employees available they can acquire. As an prospective employee, if you have two choices of companies to work for, both of which offering same compensation, you would choose the company that has a better reputation when it comes to how much disruption it gives the environment. This voluntary process of making the choice can be done without government intervention. The real reason for the existence of the EPA is it becomes a political arena for the big companies. The big oil companies love strict EPA regulations because it keeps away competition from small companies. Small companies cannot keep up with the regulations, these small companies are forced to leave the marker. The EPA is one example of federal government overreach that is prohibited by the constitution.
The EPA supportable is there to protect the environment (Global Warming). First there is conflicting evidence to prove if global warming is real. Second, when the EPA takes water rights from land owners because they currently do not have a well drilled on their property has nothing to do with global warming. I was told by the EPA to get water rights back you must pay a fee and fill out an application requesting them back. I was also told they will not give them back because water is a valuable commodity and they don't give it back. They can't stop you from filing but the list is very long and a waste of your time and money. By their actions you will be require to buy your water from a local municipality. EPA should not be called Environmental Protection Agency. It should be called. Extremely Powerful A**H***'s
You continually hear people say the EPA is there to control Climate Change. That is far from true. First there is no proof of global warming.
Second when they come on your property and tell you they are taking you water rights that wrong. Now you have to pay for water from a municipality. You can pay a fee to buy your water rights back and be put on a list but I was told by the EPA that they do not give water rights back because water is a valuable commodity. It's all about control. Their dumb argument about the military is ridiculous. Of course we spend more money to keep us safe. That is different than taking your God given rights from you.
ITS BAD BECAUSE it costs so much money for the government it hurts the people too because of the tax dollars i have read that it costs hundreds of billions of dollars and that we don't really need it because are environment is already good the point is that it is bad.!!!!!
We can not expand proven technology , do to the government's over reach simple , the over reach has too many negative effects on a capitalist society . "climate change" is going too happen no matter what us small "ants" do. The Earth doesn't "care" , we as humans want right now , our ( as humans) environment and us is all we acually care about , now enough be human beings and care for one another, not this dirt .
As much as I wouldn't want to abolish something as important as the EPA, if all other options fail such as reforming it or restaffing it all together, get rid of it and find a better way to have us citizens find other ways for protecting the environment. Fair enough?
The EPA is a waste of money, and it is unjust. It is constantly impeding the private sector with money that they stole from it in the first place. The EPA commonly uses imminent domain to seize the rightfully owned property of private citizens. I personally have been effected. Where I live, in the Permian Basin in New Mexico, there is currently an economic boom going on due to oil. However, the EPA attempted to use bad science to put the sage-brush lizard on the endangered species list, which would have ended the whole boom. Thankfully, we managed to stop it from happening.
In 2014 the EPA had a budget of about $8.2 BILLION . The US Military had a budget (presumably also for 2014) of $543.3 BILLION , outclassing the EPA by over 66x! Now, look at the good they're doing for the world...
-EPA: Working on regulating emissions to protect the atmosphere and thus YOU
-EPA: Working with manufacturers to promote "green" technology, cutting down on both emissions and your bill at the gas station
-Military: spending $1.283 TRILLION to kill an estimated 108,000 insurgents or Taliban islamists . That's about $12 million per person, which is enough to fund a medium size high school ($12,000 per student 
-Military: Entirely dedicated to essentially squashing people we don't like. At the end of the day, it's not a win for us, it's a loss for humanity.
Which would you rather fund? A force dedicated to killing and destroying (which is part of the "protection" reference I feel coming) or a force dedicated to preserving the planet?
America is a much better place to live because we have a government that regulates pollution. Markets do not provide this; in fact they create environmental problems. Clean water and air are public goods that cannot be created by the private sector. As any basic economics text will explain, markets do not work well when a company can pass the costs/consequences of its actions to a third party(in economic jargon, externalities).
The epa helps our country stay safe and healthy. Without the epa natural disasters will happen again. For example the Cuyahoga River fire or the New York City thanksgiving smog. All of those things happened before 1972 which was when the epa was when created. Since 1972 our country has been healthier and safer.
Every time there isn't some sort of regulation on air pollution or any other environmental issue we tend to overstep and put ourselves in danger of it. If we keep a government agency that will continue to regulate out of the safety and protection of others we will stay ok longer. The ban on coal isn't ridiculous since we are finding other ways to produce energy, And if there are more green cars created the price to buy one will go down.
We humans seem to disavow any contribution to the depletion of the ozone layer by our species and allow ourselves to be indoctrinated by the memes of the internet. EPA members are like lysosomes to the Earth and without their creation major cities across the United States would've looked like Hiroshima during August 9, 1945. We need to concur to the reality that the environment is not as vigorous as it was before the Industrial age. Let's accept that climate change isn't just a myth created by climate scientists to keep country people from migrating to the coast. The EPA patches the hole in the iceberg and the future and present generations are better off with them.
I think the government should regulate pollution. If some one wanted to not regulate pollution we could show them what had happened in the 1970s. Back in the day the Cuyahoga River was filled with disgusting pollution. It was filled so much that it once caught on fire. (Do We Still, pg. 15) But now it is a beautiful river that attracts tourists. For another example of how much the EPA helps, look at the diagram on pg. 15 of "Do We Still Need The EPA?". In China where there is no laws regulating pollution, There is a huge red area that only grew from 2005-2010. But in America as you can see has cleared up so much that there is barely any red spots left. Also back in the 1960s it was common to see a smog of pollution over high population cities. But now that is a thing of the past. Now we have so many acts and laws to make sure that bad things like that never happen again. But, now politicians want to have the EPA downgraded. They think that the EPA is wasteful spending and that their laws against factories are too strict and cause companies to fire people. (Do We Still, pg. 16) Whilst politicians are doing this president Donald Trump appoints Scott Pruit to head the EPA. But in his time being the leader they have lessened their laws. They have one-third fewer lawsuits. Now Political Scientists have said that the EPA's laws force factories to advance in technology. They have also said that the EPA can help the environment and help the economy. Steven Cohen has said "' For every dollar we spend on regulating air pollution, we get about $15 back in benefits.'" As you can see the EPA is a good choice over all. It helps the environment, it helps the economy, and it helps you.
Yes the government should regulate pollution because the world is still polluted and since they took away some of the EPA's power our world can stay polluted for an even longer time, "President Trump has proposed cutting the EPA's budget by 31 percent and staff by 25 percent. He's signed executive orders to lesson the agency's regulatory powers" (Klein 16). This means that in case there is an emergency or something extremely bad happens to the environment the EPA will not be able to have full power and fix the problem. In 1960 the Cuyahoga River caught on fire. This happened because of the flammables that were being dumped into the river, "Steel mills and factories had been dumping flammable, oily waste into the river" (Klein 15). Because of the disaster the EPA passed the Clean Water Act. This is only one of the many acts that have been passed by the EPA , but not many will be passed ever again because of the government taking away the EPA's power. David Lodge of Cornell University says, "If you want to see what it's like without the EPA, go to places like Beijing, China, or New Delhi, India" (Klein 17). These places are no where as clean as what it's like now in America. Human impacts such as burning fossil fuels has damaged our natural resources. The world is such a beautiful place and human activity is destroying it we need to take action and clean the world. We need the EPA to make the world beautiful again.
I am a little 50/50 on the whole situation here. I say no because our rivers and fish and all of marine wildlife are in danger. Fish and even pelicans are dying (!) because of litter and garbage that is just thrown out of a car window, or when taking a walk. Oil and gas plants are leaking, causing the oil and gas to spill into rivers and lakes! Take the Cuyahoga river for example. The river caught on FIRE because of an oil spill and litter that surrounded the bay! It caught on fire and the fish could not breathe, so they suffocated. We need the EPA to keep our marine animals alive. At the ocea, people who are on runs on the beach, just throw their garbage on the side. And baby sea turtles that go out to the ocean will try to eat the plastic or glass, and they will suffocate. That moves on to endangered species, and less marine life. This also goes for land animals too! When people just throw their trash on the ground, birds and other animals like moles will eat it. This just causes less animals, and more endangered species. These are all reasons why we need the EPA.
The EPA has changed so many things, from the pollution in the air, to the trash in the river. If we were to take away the EPA our ecosystem would fall apart. Our air would become gray and thick with smog, like in Beijing China. Our rivers would be full of trach and oil, causing it to catch fire, like the Cuyahoga river did 7 times Animals would die from eating the trash that we throw carelessly on the ground. But, even with the EPA we still do these kind of things, it's sad to see what our world is becoming. Maybe if we were to change our ways we would not have to have an EPA. I am only 12 years old and I want my future to be green.
The EPA should not be abolished because, they keep us healthy and clean. The EPA only limits factories ability to put the smoke into the air, because they want to keep our air clean. If we have clean air we have less of a chance of getting sick. They keep our water clean too. If we didn't have clean water, the animals who live in the water could die. Most of the polluted water goes to our houses. Even though the water is filtered, it is still not healthy. The EPA does much more to protect us too. Their rules are so strict because they want a less polluted world. So the EPA should not be abolished because they help us have a better, cleaner world.