Good News: Obama’s Extremist EPA Attempting To Change Rules On Navigable Waters
The Environmental Protection Agency was a great idea when it was signed into law by Richard Nixon. Protecting the environment. Who couldn’t be against an agency that does that? Over the years, though, they’ve been invaded by extremist enviro-wackos, and I’m not sure that we can even call it “mission creep” at this point. More like “mission tsunami”. And having an extremist president pushing extremist, dictatorial, totalitarian doctrines doesn’t help
(CFACT) President Obama’s shameful attacks on his fellow citizens are piling up: his “War on Coal” (a new EPA “climate” rule to destroy the coal industry) and his “War on Ranching” (a half-million-acre “national monument” smothering New Mexico ranchers), have now been topped by his “War on Everybody Else.”
By that I mean Obama’s outrageous proposed rule titled “Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’ Under the Clean Water Act” which would remove “navigable” from American water law and redefine nearly everything wet as “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS – and potentially subject us all to permits and fines.
That abomination is equivalent to invasion by hostile troops out to seize the jurisdictions of all 50 states. WOTUS gives untrustworthy federal bureaucrats custody of every watershed, creates crushing new power to coerce all who keep America going and offers no benefit to the victimized and demoralized tax-paying public.
If that sounds overly dramatic, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s Wednesday hearing titled “Potential Impacts of Proposed Changes to the Clean Water Act Jurisdictional Rule” promises to make it seem like an understatement.
Gibbs told CFACT’s Ron Arnold that “In my view this is a power grab, nothing more.” Arnold highlights how the EPA has been attempting to gain control of all waters for well over a decade. The pond in your backyard? The stream the runs on your property? The runoff from rain that creates a little standing pool? They want control of it all. The Journal Gazette and Times-Courier notes
The EPA is proposing that puddles, ponds, ditches, ephemerals and isolated wetlands fall under the Clean Water Act and expand the regulatory authority to the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The EPA and the Army Corps have the authority over the “navigable waters,” and now the possibility to include the above water features will make it more difficult to farm or change a farming operation to remain competitive and profitable.
If ditches and wet spots in fields are deemed “navigable waters,” many routine farming activities — such as building a fence, applying fertilizer, pulling weeds, etc. — will be deemed to result in a “discharge” to those so-called “navigable waters.” Activities that result in a “discharge” cannot legally go forward without the required permit.
The EPA will have the control to approve and deny a discharge permit. If denied, this would greatly restrict a farmer’s ability to farm. If approved, the farmer would need to provide paperwork and meet reporting requirements. Violations of these permits and reporting requirements carry the same potential penalties as unlawful “discharges” — up to $37,500 per violation per day and may be enforced by the EPA, the state or even interested citizens’ groups.
This rule could heavily impact farmers, which would, shocker of shocker, impact food prices. It could also affect any water that collects temporarily in fields or ditches, subjecting them to the same protections as lakes and streams that can be navigated by boats. This could even affect your decorative pond in your back yard.
This is one of the things we mean when we talk about the problems of Big Government. They grab power, then grab some more, and keep stretching their grubby, power hungry hands out. They’re never satisfied.
When Nancy Pelosi uttered the ridiculous comment the other day that “being a woman will no longer be considered a
The now thankfully former Speaker of the House Nancy “San Fran Nan” Pelosi said in a recent interview that a