House appropriators advance spending bill that would slash the EPA’s funding

posted at 5:23 pm on June 20, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Ah, such a tease! I can’t say I have much faith that, the way things stand right now, this bill will make it through untouched, but it’s beautiful to think about nonetheless.

A House committee has managed to advance a 2013 spending bill that would impose deep cuts and restrictions on the Environmental Protection Agency.

The bill cuts EPA by $1.4 billion, about 17 percent, compared to current funding. The GOP points out that this brings the EPA below fiscal 1998 funding.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), who hails from coal country, said he is especially proud of the measure, which was advanced from subcommittee to the full spending panel on a voice vote.

“This represents the strong concerns of this Congress over the EPA’s unprecedented effort to drive certain industries to extinction with a cocktail of burdensome regulations, questionable guidance policies, and arbitrary enforcement measures — all designed to shut down the permitting process for energy exploration and production,” he said.

It contains a number of environmental riders, including one to prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gases using New Source Performance Standards and one stopping EPA from expanding its ability to regulate “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act.

The bill contains several riders, including one that would stop the EPA from using the New Source Performance Standards to regulate greenhouse gases and another that would prevent them from expanding their authority to regulate “navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act (case in point: That one was their excuse for crucifying — woops, I meant persecuting — an Idaho couple in the egregious case of Sackett v. EPA).

I’ve made no secret of my unadulterated disdain for the Environmental Protection Agency — while I think there can be such a thing as effective government environmental regulation, the EPA is a wildly intrusive, power-tripping, practically unbridled band of overzealous environmentalist crusaders who are often conveniently disallowed from considering the costs of their policies because they ostensibly have only the public’s best interest in mind. Their frivolous litigation, crippling sanctions, and uncertainty-inducing agenda are some of the more significant obstacles our economy faces.

I daren’t even consider the possibility that the EPA could someday be eliminated (le sigh…), but the thought of at least watching them take any kind of a hit that could rein in some of their wanton regulatory ways, instead of being allowed to metastasize even more, pleases me to no end. (Especially since, you know, we’ve been operating at above trillion-dollar deficits and a lot of stuff has just got to go.)

Politico and certain Democrats have labeled Republicans’ various efforts to put the brakes on some of the EPA’s forthcoming rules and regulations as an “attack”:

Oh, and there were at least 10 — count ‘em 10 — Capitol Hill hearings and markups on environmental matters Tuesday.

This week is just the latest round of a Republican attack that has forced the White House to hold back on new environmental regulations, lawmakers say — at least for now.

“They have slowed down some of that stuff, but it’s only until after the election,” Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said. “After that, it’s going to be scary.” …

“The unrelenting attacks by the Republicans on environmental protection, I think, have caused people in the administration to be careful to pick their fights,” said California Rep. Henry Waxman, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

You’re dang straight it’s an attack — I should hope that Republicans keep on engaging in a full-frontal assault on the out-of-control independent agency that manages to kill jobs and opportunities like its their sole purpose in life.

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Let me know when they do the right thing, and cut the EPA budget to zero.

Vashta.Nerada on June 20, 2012 at 5:26 PM

The bill cuts EPA by $1.4 billion, about 17 percent

Keep going, fellas. Needs to be 100%.

iurockhead on June 20, 2012 at 5:29 PM

The GOP needs to pay the Dems game. Target a 25% reduction by going for a hefty 50% reduction and bargain down to 25. REAL cuts too, not cuts to growth.

Charlemagne on June 20, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Amen..it’s about time!

Don L on June 20, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Maybe there is a perfect world after all.

Bmore on June 20, 2012 at 5:31 PM

I’m looking forward to Mitt Romney making a few executive orders:

1) The IRS shall collect no more than 10% of any individual’s or corporation’s income
2) The EPA shall have no authority to regulate or enforce any laws or statutes and shall act only in an advisory manner when and if requested by the Executive branch.

I could keep going, but I get overheated very easily…

Rixon on June 20, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Let me know when they do the right thing, and cut the EPA budget to zero.

Vashta.Nerada on June 20, 2012 at 5:26 PM

Ya that’s more like it. I want to see a 100% funding cut.

dentarthurdent on June 20, 2012 at 5:33 PM

next headline from the leftist media…People will die in the streets.

little children will choke to death on coal dust and particulates…life expectancy will go back to the early 20th century.

and Hansen will be back with his coal train–holocast speeches

/s

r keller on June 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM

“The unrelenting attacks by the Republicans on environmental protection,…..

It’s an attack in the same way that taking antibiiotics is an “attack” on streptococcus.

iurockhead on June 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Rixon on June 20, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Those first 2 alone would make Romney’s entire first 4 years worthwhile.

dentarthurdent on June 20, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Wait for it… it’s coming…

Republicans want to poison our air and water.

bgibbs1000 on June 20, 2012 at 5:36 PM

The smaller the EPA, the more jobs for Americans. When the EPA reaches ZERO (no bureaucrats and no money), America will have FULL EMPLOYMENT (including those MILLION ILLEGALS that OBOZO will give “work papers” to.)

TeaPartyNation on June 20, 2012 at 5:37 PM

on a related point…this can’t be good for the left can it:

At least half a dozen Democratic officials have said in recent days that they won’t attend the Democratic National Convention this September in Charlotte, North Carolina, where the president will formally receive the party’s nomination for a second term. The latest: New York Democratic Reps. Bill Owens and Kathy Hochul, both of whom won special elections in recent years – in 2009 and 2011, respectively – that were heralded by party leaders.

r keller on June 20, 2012 at 5:38 PM

It’s an attack in the same way that taking antibiiotics is an “attack” on streptococcus.

iurockhead on June 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM

And the same as some lib trolls have tried to claim that guy in Texas “attacked” the guy molesting his daughter.
Libs have no morals, integrity or shame.

dentarthurdent on June 20, 2012 at 5:40 PM

Gut the EPA. Most all of their freedom & business & energy strangling regulations are based on the notion of global warming, er climate change. And AGW is bs. The hockey stick has been shown to be bullshit, bull-hockey: a fabrication of an artful agenda-driven bs artist. So, there’s nothing out of the ordinary about current temps. So, there’s nothing wrong with the climate. And the ipcc’s foundational claim of a causal correlation between temps and CO2 has been indisputably repudiated; see algor made a fool of by repeating the false ipcc claim here in this must see video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg

Now conservatives have finally come aboard, are longer fooled by the leftist scare-mongers. An excerpt from my wuwt comment:

What amazes me is just a few short years ago nearly everybody seemed to be going along with the scam, even conservatives. Now skeptic Senator Inhofe’s position on climate change is the “new normal,” and he is leading the way: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=eb26d140-802a-23ad-4a8f-cc2a20647095.
But, amazing yet so sad quote from the link, Inhofe said: “I was all alone starting in 2001. When you’re an army of one you don’t get much attention.” How was it that the leftist econuts and their liberal political allies duped conservatives, virtually across the board?? Someone needs to tell the story.

anotherJoe on June 20, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Well my goodness, things are NOT going too well for bho/team this week either are they? POOR widdle bho.

Soon, soon bho is gonna have a melt down, WAIT for it? It is going to be a red banner day when that happens!
L

letget on June 20, 2012 at 5:44 PM

The GOP needs to pay the Dems game. Target a 25% reduction by going for a hefty 50% reduction and bargain down to 25. REAL cuts too, not cuts to growth.

Charlemagne on June 20, 2012 at 5:30 PM

that is a good start …. and within 2 years cut it to zero ….

conservative tarheel on June 20, 2012 at 5:44 PM

KILL the EPA!

GarandFan on June 20, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Wait for it… it’s coming…

Republicans want to poison our air and water.

bgibbs1000 on June 20, 2012 at 5:36 PM

count on it…

Tim Zank on June 20, 2012 at 5:48 PM

“And the seas will recede and the planet will heal – (edited out from the speech: and the economy will be destroyed)”

- King Tuts

NapaConservative on June 20, 2012 at 5:52 PM

You’re dang straight it’s an attack

Actually no because the was the EPA that attacked first so this should be called a counterattack.

JeffinSac on June 20, 2012 at 5:54 PM

I’m looking forward to Mitt Romney making a few executive orders:

1) The IRS shall collect no more than 10% of any individual’s or corporation’s income
2) The EPA shall have no authority to regulate or enforce any laws or statutes and shall act only in an advisory manner when and if requested by the Executive branch.

I could keep going, but I get overheated very easily…

Rixon on June 20, 2012 at 5:32 PM

Didn’t you get the memo? Executive orders are okay only when the President is Democrat; otherwise, it’s evil, shocking, unprecedented, fascistic, and any scary word the lick-spittle media can tear out of their thesauruses.

squint on June 20, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Why does the house always pass bills that will never pass the senate? They know Its going straight into Reid’s garbage can but still pass it anyway.

Fail

loveofcountry on June 20, 2012 at 6:04 PM

Why does the house always pass bills that will never pass the senate? They know Its going straight into Reid’s garbage can but still pass it anyway.

Fail

loveofcountry on June 20, 2012 at 6:04 PM

They gotta do something for what we pay them.

squint on June 20, 2012 at 6:07 PM

EPA is SOL, come JAN.

TheClearRiver on June 20, 2012 at 6:08 PM

YES, YES, YES!!!

Bambi on June 20, 2012 at 6:08 PM

The bill urgently needs an amendment to prohibit the EPA from imposing any regulations to control essential gases, such as CO2 and Oxygen, and voiding all existing regulations which attempt to do so. The EPA must also be prohibited from outlawing any naturally-occurring substance (because it is illogical and abusive to do so).

Another needed rider is a provision to prevent the EPA from imposing any regulation unless:

1. There is independently-reproducible, scientific proof of actual imminent harm to human life, and that at least a 2/3 majority of the electorate agrees with the EPA’s definition of “harm”. “Prospective harm” which cannot be reproducibly proven may not be used as the basis for any regulation.

2. EPA must conclusively prove that their “solution” is less harmful to human citizens (including their health, liberty, and property) than the present situation, and that the affected human citizens agree with it. In case of a conflict, EPA regulations must be approved by both houses of Congress (the same as for any other law) before they may be funded or implemented in any way.

3. In all EPA proceedings, ONLY THE OPINIONS OF ACTUAL CITIZENS COUNT: non-humans and non-citizen aliens may not be considered.

4. In all matters, EPA regulations must be 100% within the boundaries of existing law.

5. All existing EPA regulation which are not 100% in conformance with any of the above are VOID and must be removed from all EPA books and literature. All funding and implementation activities for these non-conforming regulations must immediately cease.

landlines on June 20, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Wait for it… it’s coming…

Republicans want to poison our air and water.

bgibbs1000 on June 20, 2012 at 5:36 PM

count on it…

Tim Zank on June 20, 2012 at 5:48 PM

NOOOO! They’ve already mucked it up and we need to fix it!

ericdijon on June 20, 2012 at 6:09 PM

Oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please!!

The Rogue Tomato on June 20, 2012 at 6:12 PM

slash the EPA’s funding

Just SEQUESTED the entire EPA Budget. Well, it’s a start ;)

CiLH1 on June 20, 2012 at 6:17 PM

A good start but will end up in Dingy Harry’s circular file for sure.Once we get the Senate and the WH we should look at total abolition of this worthless agency.

jeffinsjvca on June 20, 2012 at 6:18 PM

SEQUESTER

CiLH1 on June 20, 2012 at 6:18 PM

They’re doing it backwards.

Start with a blank sheet of paper. Dig out that dogeared copy of the Constitution, and start from Article I, section 8:

“The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes,” — ok, the IRS stays.

“Duties,” — US Customs is in.

“Imposts and Excises,” — I think that’s the IRS again.

“to pay the Debts” — Department of Treasury is in.

“and provide for the common defence” — DoD makes the cut.

….and so on. Every single agency left over at the end of the section (including, but not limited to, the EPA, the Departments of Education, Agriculture, Labor, HHS, HUD, and Energy) should be eliminated outright.

It’s just common sense to start with the Constitution, with its very short list, instead of starting deep in the weeds here.

cthulhu on June 20, 2012 at 6:53 PM

The EPA only questions coal because its black.

aposematic on June 20, 2012 at 6:56 PM

cthulhu on June 20, 2012 at 6:53 PM

good thought … but I kinda like the idea of a Dept. of Ag.
I like food inspections … and checking shit coming in
from overseas and at our borders …
I am funny that way ….

conservative tarheel on June 20, 2012 at 6:58 PM

The EPA only questions coal because its black.

aposematic on June 20, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Seriously, there’s a lot of truth in that. The handling of coal is a dirty business, though you don’t get dirty using electricity that comes from coal.

If coal was brilliant white with little candy sparkles in it, would the proggies hate it with such a passion?

slickwillie2001 on June 20, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Have you seen the EPA TV ads about boatloads of babies dying from lead paint poisoning? Jeez…..lead paint was outlawed decades ago. How many babies are chewing on government equipment, the only place where lead paint is legal used today?

jb34461 on June 20, 2012 at 7:16 PM

The GOP needs to pay the Dems game. Target a 25% reduction by going for a hefty 50% reduction and bargain down to 25. REAL cuts too, not cuts to growth.

Charlemagne on June 20, 2012 at 5:30 PM

…go for 99%…of real reduction…until we can get the Senate…Harry Reid won’t let it out of the ring…he’s only worried about boxing.

KOOLAID2 on June 20, 2012 at 7:19 PM

The GOP needs to pay the Dems game. Target a 25% reduction by going for a hefty 50% reduction and bargain down to 25. REAL cuts too, not cuts to growth.

Charlemagne on June 20, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Even better… IF Romney wins… issue an Executive Order moving the EPA administration facilities closer to the environment they wish to regulate… such as Prudoe Bay, Alaska… with no moving expenses or work-from-home allowed. Watch the EPA disappear by attrition!

After all, EXECUTION of the law occurs through the Executive Branch! [evil grin]

dominigan on June 20, 2012 at 7:27 PM

They’re doing it backwards.

Start with a blank sheet of paper. Dig out that dogeared copy of the Constitution, and start from Article I, section 8:

“The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes,” — ok, the IRS stays.

“Duties,” — US Customs is in.

“Imposts and Excises,” — I think that’s the IRS again.

“to pay the Debts” — Department of Treasury is in.

“and provide for the common defence” — DoD makes the cut.

….and so on. Every single agency left over at the end of the section (including, but not limited to, the EPA, the Departments of Education, Agriculture, Labor, HHS, HUD, and Energy) should be eliminated outright.

It’s just common sense to start with the Constitution, with its very short list, instead of starting deep in the weeds here.

cthulhu on June 20, 2012 at 6:53 PM

STANDS AND APPLAUDS!!! My feeling exactly! Preach it! I’m sorry if anyone is offended for bolding all that, but gosh darn it, we need to DEMAND this of our representatives!

dominigan on June 20, 2012 at 7:31 PM

I’ve made no secret of my unadulterated disdain for the Environmental Protection Agency — while I think there can be such a thing as effective government environmental regulation, the EPA is a wildly intrusive, power-tripping, practically unbridled band of overzealous environmentalist crusaders who are often conveniently disallowed from considering the costs of their policies because they ostensibly have only the public’s best interest in mind. Their frivolous litigation, crippling sanctions, and uncertainty-inducing agenda are some of the more significant obstacles our economy faces.

I’m starting to really like you.

In the military, when Clinton came into office, we were informed that the EPA was watching everything we did, and improperly disposing of any materials — like failing to reclaim RF12 with an authorized refrigerant reclaiming device, or failing to recycle antifreeze — could lead to thousands of dollars in personal fines.

Priorities,you know.

tom on June 20, 2012 at 7:36 PM

conservative tarheel on June 20, 2012 at 6:58 PM

While many food inspections are good, the USDA has become a problem. I have a friend who runs a vitamin business (mostly through doctors), and the USDA has conducted multiple raids, lawsuits and illegal confiscations. IN EVERY SINGLE CASE, judges have ruled against the USDA and for my friend’s business. They have become just as bad as the EPA and ATF.

dominigan on June 20, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Since Congress should be doing each agency separately so as to better track spending… let everyone know that it is a cut or nothing.

And, really, the States have various departments of environmental quality or other such things, so the EPA is duplicative of State bureaucracies. If there are cross-State concerns they can agree to formulate their own system to deal with it so long as they are not trying to usurp the granted powers to the federal government nor stop free and open trade amongst the States. Really, the States can do a much better and lower cost job of this than the federal government ever can… and since the States and the people get everything not enumerated to the federal government that is where this stuff should be.

Just like agriculture. Education. Energy. Labor. HHS. Anything having to do with real estate. Say, how about a 10 year sunset that requires re-upping each and every agency, law, rule, regulation and anything that isn’t an enumerated power? Whatever the last digit is on the year something is started, that is when it must be re-authorized. Simple 50%+1 in both Houses and Presidential signature required. If it isn’t enumerated it must be re-argued regularly so as to NOT step on the rights of the States and the people to utilize these powers.

ajacksonian on June 20, 2012 at 7:39 PM

While many food inspections are good, the USDA has become a problem. I have a friend who runs a vitamin business (mostly through doctors), and the USDA has conducted multiple raids, lawsuits and illegal confiscations. IN EVERY SINGLE CASE, judges have ruled against the USDA and for my friend’s business. They have become just as bad as the EPA and ATF.

dominigan on June 20, 2012 at 7:36 PM

agreed … all agencies need to be reined in … HARD …
but of the ones listed Ag is one I can support … limit
what they can do …. but it is a job that needs to be done …

conservative tarheel on June 20, 2012 at 7:49 PM

EPA needs to go ….
ATF should be a connivence store … :D
energy needs to go …
HHS bye bye …
Labor …. out of here …

conservative tarheel on June 20, 2012 at 7:53 PM

I’ve got a better idea, eliminate the EPA altogether along with dozens of other useless economy killing agencies on the Hill.

And REPEAL all of their power to make laws!

Axion on June 20, 2012 at 8:07 PM

While many food inspections are good, the USDA has become a problem. I have a friend who runs a vitamin business (mostly through doctors), and the USDA has conducted multiple raids, lawsuits and illegal confiscations. IN EVERY SINGLE CASE, judges have ruled against the USDA and for my friend’s business. They have become just as bad as the EPA and ATF.

dominigan on June 20, 2012 at 7:36 PM

“Drop the Vitamin B and put your hands in the air.”

Fire all of them SOBs. They won’t be missed.

slickwillie2001 on June 20, 2012 at 9:20 PM

17% is a reasonable start.

40% from 2012 levels would be better.

JEM on June 20, 2012 at 9:31 PM

These agencies, all of them, are staffed primarily with Democrats so even when the GOP is in power, these people still control the agencies. It’s not enough to cut the budget, the Houses need to control the agencies themselves. When the Houses let go of the purse strings, they basically sold the farm. EPA creats more and more regulations then need more and more money to operate. Don’t let them create regulations without oversight…period. I imagine millions of dollars could be saved simply by changing requirements from annually to every two years, and weekly to monthly, and monthly to quarterly, etc. If every agency in our government did that, the savings would be enormous.

Ken James on June 20, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Of course the bill doesn’t make it through, the Senate has hardly done anything at all this term because Reid won’t let anything come to a vote that might hurt Obama or help Republicans – and everything worthwhile would do one or both.

However, Republicans in the House can refuse to support any continuing resolution at current spending levels and require the cuts to EPA and other agencies. It will be right before the election, but a federal government shutdown is a fitting denouement to the failed Obama regime. We just need to start pointing out – loudly and often – that Obama’s plan already is to provoke a shutdown and blame Republicans for it.

Adjoran on June 20, 2012 at 11:03 PM

This is just stupid…it will backfire. You don’t need to do things like this for your base…Obama already will. This like the contempt thing only hurts our candidate. It DOES look like politics.

tomas on June 21, 2012 at 7:15 AM

I like an EPA budget of zero. They are unelected rogue thugs terrorizing citizens just because they have a puddle of water on their property that these unsane people call a wetland. Time for their tyranny to end.

insidiator on June 21, 2012 at 7:22 AM

All executive departments need to be nailed by Congress as these departments have usurped the power of the purse by setting up fines and fee schedules well outside of their original charters, as well as de facto lawmakers with these departments “rule making” powers.

If you can end up in prison for breaking a rule, it is not a rule it is a law and we have a Congress for those.

Nathan_OH on June 21, 2012 at 9:21 AM