WARNING: Trump’s EPA Secretary Will Have ‘16,000 Employees Working Against Him’

[Right_in_Virginia]

WARNING: Trump’s EPA Secretary Will Have ‘16,000 Employees Working Against Him’
The Daily Caller, Jan 28, 2017, Christopher Bedford

PALM SPRINGS, CALIF. — When likely EPA Secretary Scott Pruitt walks into his first day at the office, “He’ll have 16,000 employees working against him,” Sen. James Lankford told a large gathering of libertarian donors Saturday evening.

“And I expect a flood of lawsuits over everything he does.”

Pruitt, who has been nominated to lead the EPA by President Donald Trump, is the attorney general of Lankford’s state, Oklahoma. He has faced fierce opposition from the environmentalist left.

Lankford, who chairs the Senate Oversight Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Health Care and Entitlements, was joined on stage by Sens. Mike Lee and Pat Toomey. Their panel, moderated by Americans for Prosperity President Tim Phillips, was during a dinner on day one of Charles and David Koch’s libertarian Seminar Network in Palm Springs, Calif.


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/28/warning-trumps-epa-secretary-will-have-16000-employees-working-against-him/#ixzz4XC7lDSCt

[Right_in_Virginia]

Maybe 15,000 of them should be updating their resumes.   

[Wingnut]

Hyperbole much Sen Lambchop?

What a twit.

[Hondo69]

Trump’s EPA Secretary Will Have ‘16,000 Employees Working Against Him

Let's break this down into common sense bits:

EPA Secretary - Why do we have an EPA Secretary to begin with?  Don't tell me that department has grown into such a behemoth that it needs it's own Secretary.

16,000 Employees - Uh oh, my bad.  I guess it really has grown into a behemoth and every red blooded American knows that is just downright unacceptable.  We better fix that ASAP.

With the proper tools we can begin a dialog with the EPA.

[mountaineer]

It's up to conservative/libertarian members of Congress to repeal or amend those laws that created the monstrosity that is the EPA. Cut it down to size, in other words.

[Suppressed]

It's up to conservative/libertarian members of Congress to repeal or amend those laws that created the monstrosity that is the EPA. Cut it down to size, in other words.

IMO, the key is to reverse the mission creep, going back to a focus on its core mission.

I recognize that a potential threat from climate change would fall under them, but far too much focus has been put onto excessive regulation of air emissions. (Not including mercury emissions in that...those were important.)

[mountaineer]

IMO, the key is to reverse the mission creep, going back to a focus on its core mission.

I recognize that a potential threat from climate change would fall under them, but far too much focus has been put onto excessive regulation of air emissions. (Not including mercury emissions in that...those were important.)

I agree it's appropriate for EPA to limit the amount of harmful chemicals in the air and water (including the ones EPA itself is responsible for dumping, but I digress). But they've gone overboard and made such things as completely shutting down coal production their mission.

[Suppressed]

I agree it's appropriate for EPA to limit the amount of harmful chemicals in the air and water (including the ones EPA itself is responsible for dumping, but I digress). But they've gone overboard and made such things as completely shutting down coal production their mission.

We have such wonderful coal resources, and coal is far better for stationary power production than transportation.  Oil and gas are far better for transportation, so we should be saving them for that and using coal for electricity.  But we have to be careful to not go back to birth-defect bullseyes downwind of power plants (heavy metals like mercury and arsenic have a great affinity for the carbon of coal, so dirty coal smoke will create a nasty downwind problem without good emission controls). 

[r9etb]

Hyperbole much Sen Lambchop?

What a twit.

He's spot on, actually.

Perhaps you, like I, have been seeing a lot of left-of-center references to "lawfare" of late.  For the organizations who'd oppose Pruitt, they have a very long record of using litigation (successfully) as a weapon to delay or prevent various actions.

[Free Vulcan]

We need to rewrite the environmental laws into something more restricted and  balanced in terms of what the EPA can do. Must hear all sides, must be balanced, and not allow things like enviro groups suing to create regulations, and then being on the panel that creates them.

[r9etb]

We need to rewrite the environmental laws into something more restricted and  balanced in terms of what the EPA can do. Must hear all sides, must be balanced, and not allow things like enviro groups suing to create regulations, and then being on the panel that creates them.

It's probably well past that.  The EPA is an entrenched bureaucracy within which various environmental groups have established themselves as equal partners.  They actually help to write the EPA regulations, and help to field and respond to comments.  And there's a revolving door between the groups and the EPA, much as there's a revolving door between Treasury and Wall Street.

[Doug Loss]

Well then, perhaps the best thing to do would be to abolish the EPA, and if needed (I'm not sure it is) replace it with a brand new Department of Environmental Resources.  Staffed with all-new employees, of course...

[Norm Lenhart]

Well then, perhaps the best thing to do would be to abolish the EPA, and if needed (I'm not sure it is) replace it with a brand new Department of Environmental Resources.  Staffed with all-new employees, of course...

THAT is the correct course of action.

[txradioguy]

Hyperbole much Sen Lambchop?

What a twit.

In a way he's got a point.  The guy taking over the EPA is anti Global Warming IIRC....and pretty much everything else the EPA has done to us over the last 8 years.

It's going to be an uphill battle.

But then it sounds like the EPA needs to trim it's staff by about 16,000 anyway.

[Suppressed]

We need to rewrite the environmental laws into something more restricted and  balanced in terms of what the EPA can do. Must hear all sides, must be balanced, and not allow things like enviro groups suing to create regulations, and then being on the panel that creates them.

It irritates me that conservatives don't take advantage of the opportunities that are provided, as is.  I guarantee that liberals will be using public comment periods to throw speedbumps in front of Trump Administration initiatives.

[Hondo69]

The EPA cooked their own goose by becoming ultra radical.

The don't know the difference between conservationist and environmentalists that dream of world domination via Agenda 21.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

For those interested in where the EPA spends its yearly budget of $ 8.267 billion:


Funding Highlights:
• The President’s FY 2017 Budget provides $8.267 billion in discretionary funding for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to protect people’s health and the environment in
which we live. This includes:
• Making differences in communities across the country through on-the-ground efforts in
Brownfields, Urban Waters, Community Resource Coordinators and Circuit Riders,
advanced monitoring technologies, and technical assistance for climate change resilience
and adaptation. The agency will continue to implement new and innovative methods to
reduce pollution nationwide, as well as provide continued enforcement of environmental
laws and regulations;
• Supporting the President’s Climate Action Plan to reduce carbon pollution from power
plants, vehicles and other sources by using cleaner energy sources and cutting wastes;
• Enhancing work in water infrastructure with a focus on sustainability, innovative
financing and resiliency along with assistance to small communities through the Water
Infrastructure and Resilience Finance Center;
• Accelerating investment in our nation’s infrastructure by providing supplemental credit
assistance to projects of major importance to the water sector through the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program;
• Improving the safety and security of chemical facilities by expanding support to local
communities to improve communication, coordination, and capacity, delivering on the
White House Executive Order on Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security; and
• Addressing unhealthy exhaust levels facing children who spend significant time riding
diesel powered vehicles as part of a multi-agency effort to invest in a cleaner, more
resilient transportation infrastructure for the 21st Century.

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-02/documents/fy17-budget-in-brief.pdf

I see nothing in this list that cannot be done by the states.

Eliminate the whole agency.  That $8.3 billion can go towards building the wall until we extract payment from Mexico

[Hondo69]

If the States take over those duties then all those lobbyists are going to really busy flying all around the country.  They may even find it more convenient, and cheaper, to move to Omaha.  If enough lobbyists choose to leave the D.C. area then eventually housing prices will begin to fall.  And then a few more dominoes down the line we may even discover Washington D.C. eventually has affordable housing again.

Unintended consequences