You may have heard that the current administration is not very pro-science. No governmental agency is impacted more (at least currently) than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The new head of the EPA doesn’t’ seem to understand basic climate science.
That sucks, but things could be worse, right? On wait…. As part of the cryptically titled executive order “Enforcing the regulatory reform agenda”, the EPA is reviewing its existing regulations. As is the law, the EPA is required to seek public comment on any potential changes.
The good news is that they have done just that – posting a request for comment on their “evaluations of existing regulations”. The bad news? There is a lot of bad news. No specific proposed regulations or regulatory roll-backs are mentioned. Instead, this is just a call for suggestions of what regulations to cut. The notice gives some handy suggestions, and they are deeply troubling. In the request for comment, the EPA states that it is targeting regulations that do the following:
i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;
(ii) are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;
(iii) impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform initiatives and policies;
(v) are inconsistent with the requirements of section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriates Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note), or the guidance issued pursuant to that provision in particular those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard of reproducibility; or
(vi) derive from or implement Executive Orders or other Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or substantially modified.”
Yipes! Nowhere in the above rules is the need to protect the environment or human health even mentioned. It’s all about jobs and cost. Loosely translated, this means that the EPA is planning to value money over protecting the environment and human health. Relaxation of clean air standards could lead to increased rates of asthma and deaths among those with reduced lung function, not to mention the acceleration of global warming. The clean water act regulations could be significantly affected as well. That’s ok, clean water is over-rated.
It’s important to understand that changes to literally decades worth of environmental regulations can not be accomplished overnight. Any changes will take time. Still, heading back towards pre-regulation times when the air in Los Angeles was unsafe to breathe on most days or one of the great lakes was effectively dead is something most people would like to avoid.
So let the EPA know what you think. Click here to comment. Tell them not to repeal the clean water act or reduce the emissions standards. Tell them to value human health over money. Tell them whatever you want – just let your voice be heard!
Share
Want to comment on the proposed roll-back of EPA regulations? Here’s how!
You may have heard that the current administration is not very pro-science. No governmental agency is impacted more (at least currently) than the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The new head of the EPA doesn’t’ seem to understand basic climate science.
That sucks, but things could be worse, right? On wait…. As part of the cryptically titled executive order “Enforcing the regulatory reform agenda”, the EPA is reviewing its existing regulations. As is the law, the EPA is required to seek public comment on any potential changes.
The good news is that they have done just that – posting a request for comment on their “evaluations of existing regulations”. The bad news? There is a lot of bad news. No specific proposed regulations or regulatory roll-backs are mentioned. Instead, this is just a call for suggestions of what regulations to cut. The notice gives some handy suggestions, and they are deeply troubling. In the request for comment, the EPA states that it is targeting regulations that do the following:
i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;
(ii) are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;
(iii) impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with regulatory reform initiatives and policies;
(v) are inconsistent with the requirements of section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriates Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516 note), or the guidance issued pursuant to that provision in particular those regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently transparent to meet the standard of reproducibility; or
(vi) derive from or implement Executive Orders or other Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or substantially modified.”
Yipes! Nowhere in the above rules is the need to protect the environment or human health even mentioned. It’s all about jobs and cost. Loosely translated, this means that the EPA is planning to value money over protecting the environment and human health. Relaxation of clean air standards could lead to increased rates of asthma and deaths among those with reduced lung function, not to mention the acceleration of global warming. The clean water act regulations could be significantly affected as well. That’s ok, clean water is over-rated.
It’s important to understand that changes to literally decades worth of environmental regulations can not be accomplished overnight. Any changes will take time. Still, heading back towards pre-regulation times when the air in Los Angeles was unsafe to breathe on most days or one of the great lakes was effectively dead is something most people would like to avoid.
So let the EPA know what you think. Click here to comment. Tell them not to repeal the clean water act or reduce the emissions standards. Tell them to value human health over money. Tell them whatever you want – just let your voice be heard!
ShareYou may also like