Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
-
- Posts: 4360
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm
Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ene ... df6fd99368
The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy. They are moving forward on repealing the reviled (in Agricultural Circles) WOTUS rule-(Waters of the United States.)
This is probably the number 1 thing that farmers were hoping for in a Trump Administration.
It had dominated agricultural media for the last couple years as few other things have done.
The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy. They are moving forward on repealing the reviled (in Agricultural Circles) WOTUS rule-(Waters of the United States.)
This is probably the number 1 thing that farmers were hoping for in a Trump Administration.
It had dominated agricultural media for the last couple years as few other things have done.
- silverscreenselect
- Posts: 23523
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
I wonder how people who are interested in having clean drinking water feel about this.Spock wrote: The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com
- jarnon
- Posts: 6378
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
- Location: Merion, Pa.
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
What does earendel think about this rule?
Слава Україні!
עם ישראל חי
עם ישראל חי
- Jeemie
- Posts: 7303
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:35 pm
- Location: City of Champions Once More (Well, in spirit)!!!!
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
No...this is one rule that was a huge unnecessary federal overreach.silverscreenselect wrote:I wonder how people who are interested in having clean drinking water feel about this.Spock wrote: The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy.
This was the one where Obama tried to claim federal juridstiction over any body of water down to a puddle or the runoff from my hose when I washed my car. (Ok...an exaggeration, but not much of one).
1979 City of Champions 2009
- littleblueneon
- Merry Man
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:42 am
- Location: Rusting in peace, finally!
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Jeemie wrote:This was the one where Obama tried to claim federal juridstiction over any body of water down to a puddle or the runoff from my hose when I washed my car.
What a waste of perfectly good water....
Beep!Beep!
- BackInTex
- Posts: 12890
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
- Location: In Texas of course!
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Why do you wonder? Are you not interested in having clean drinking water?silverscreenselect wrote:I wonder how people who are interested in having clean drinking water feel about this.Spock wrote: The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy.
I don't wonder. I am interested in having clean drinking water. And I approve of this repeal.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson
War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)
~~ Thomas Jefferson
War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)
- silverscreenselect
- Posts: 23523
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Not surprisingly, actual scientists do not agree with you, Spock, and Trump. Of course, you might be among the 2/3 of Americans not affected by the repeal of this regulation.BackInTex wrote: I don't wonder. I am interested in having clean drinking water. And I approve of this repeal.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... er-supply/
James Salzman, a professor of environmental law at the University of California, Los Angeles, says Trump’s order suggests the future rule will likely lift controls on these smaller “ephemeral and intermittent” streams—those that typically flow only when it rains, and those with segments that only flow certain times of the year, such as when snow melts. Even though ephemeral and intermittent streams do not run continuously—which some argue is why they do not qualify for protection—scientists have found they are still key to water quality of the larger bodies in which they flow. “These streams are connected” to waters downstream, says Ken Reckhow, professor emeritus of water resources at Duke University—and they can carry pollutants to places where communities may draw their drinking water.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com
- Bob Juch
- Posts: 26556
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
- Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
- Contact:
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Every stream here is an “ephemeral and intermittent” stream. All of our water comes from them.silverscreenselect wrote:Not surprisingly, actual scientists do not agree with you, Spock, and Trump. Of course, you might be among the 2/3 of Americans not affected by the repeal of this regulation.BackInTex wrote: I don't wonder. I am interested in having clean drinking water. And I approve of this repeal.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... er-supply/
James Salzman, a professor of environmental law at the University of California, Los Angeles, says Trump’s order suggests the future rule will likely lift controls on these smaller “ephemeral and intermittent” streams—those that typically flow only when it rains, and those with segments that only flow certain times of the year, such as when snow melts. Even though ephemeral and intermittent streams do not run continuously—which some argue is why they do not qualify for protection—scientists have found they are still key to water quality of the larger bodies in which they flow. “These streams are connected” to waters downstream, says Ken Reckhow, professor emeritus of water resources at Duke University—and they can carry pollutants to places where communities may draw their drinking water.
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)
Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.
Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)
Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.
Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.
- Appa23
- Posts: 3750
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:04 pm
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Probably feel that they are glad that they actually research things before they post on the internet , because they learned that their state actually has environmental agencies that handle things outside of federal jurisdiction.silverscreenselect wrote:I wonder how people who are interested in having clean drinking water feel about this.Spock wrote: The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy.
- silverscreenselect
- Posts: 23523
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
But the whole point of this regulation is that these things are in federal jurisdiction, and the water cleanliness is something that states, even if they were so inclined (which a number of them aren't due to lack of funding or a lack fo desire to take on business interests), can't always handle because a lot of pollution occurs before the water gets to that state.Appa23 wrote: Probably feel that they are glad that they actually research things before they post on the internet , because they learned that their state actually has environmental agencies that handle things outside of federal jurisdiction.
And, as the article I cited indicated, a lot of the problem occurs in the waterways that Trump has just turned his back on.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com
- earendel
- Posts: 13610
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 5:25 am
- Location: mired in the bureaucracy
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
I have no opinion.jarnon wrote:What does earendel think about this rule?
"Elen sila lumenn omentielvo...A star shines on the hour of our meeting."
-
- Posts: 4360
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Spoken by the Atlanta liberal who has never met a regulation that he doesn't like. It is likely that the blowback against the Obama rule is one reason that Trump's margins were goosed in many rural areas.silverscreenselect wrote:But the whole point of this regulation is that these things are in federal jurisdiction, and the water cleanliness is something that states, even if they were so inclined (which a number of them aren't due to lack of funding or a lack fo desire to take on business interests), can't always handle because a lot of pollution occurs before the water gets to that state.Appa23 wrote: Probably feel that they are glad that they actually research things before they post on the internet , because they learned that their state actually has environmental agencies that handle things outside of federal jurisdiction.
And, as the article I cited indicated, a lot of the problem occurs in the waterways that Trump has just turned his back on.
- Bob78164
- Bored Moderator
- Posts: 21696
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
- Location: By the phone
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
That may be. But that doesn't mean the regulation was unnecessary or that its expense was unwarranted. It may well mean that rural voters were perfectly willing to externalize the cost of polluting intermittent waterways because (by definition of "externalize") someone else would end up paying the price.Spock wrote:Spoken by the Atlanta liberal who has never met a regulation that he doesn't like. It is likely that the blowback against the Obama rule is one reason that Trump's margins were goosed in many rural areas.silverscreenselect wrote:But the whole point of this regulation is that these things are in federal jurisdiction, and the water cleanliness is something that states, even if they were so inclined (which a number of them aren't due to lack of funding or a lack fo desire to take on business interests), can't always handle because a lot of pollution occurs before the water gets to that state.Appa23 wrote: Probably feel that they are glad that they actually research things before they post on the internet , because they learned that their state actually has environmental agencies that handle things outside of federal jurisdiction.
And, as the article I cited indicated, a lot of the problem occurs in the waterways that Trump has just turned his back on.
How much pollution does enter other waterways and water supplies from these intermittent waterways? How much does it cost to prevent or ameliorate that pollution at the source? If not prevented or ameliorated, what's the cost of that pollution to others? I'm guessing that these answers can be found in the paperwork supporting the regulation in the first place. I'm fairly confident that competing answers supported by sound science cannot be found in the present-day EPA. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson
-
- Posts: 4360
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
If the waters are so dirty and the rule was so necessary, why did the Obama team wait until 2015 (or so) to do the rule? Why not 5 years earlier?Bob78164 wrote:That may be. But that doesn't mean the regulation was unnecessary or that its expense was unwarranted. It may well mean that rural voters were perfectly willing to externalize the cost of polluting intermittent waterways because (by definition of "externalize") someone else would end up paying the price.Spock wrote:Spoken by the Atlanta liberal who has never met a regulation that he doesn't like. It is likely that the blowback against the Obama rule is one reason that Trump's margins were goosed in many rural areas.silverscreenselect wrote:
But the whole point of this regulation is that these things are in federal jurisdiction, and the water cleanliness is something that states, even if they were so inclined (which a number of them aren't due to lack of funding or a lack fo desire to take on business interests), can't always handle because a lot of pollution occurs before the water gets to that state.
And, as the article I cited indicated, a lot of the problem occurs in the waterways that Trump has just turned his back on.
How much pollution does enter other waterways and water supplies from these intermittent waterways? How much does it cost to prevent or ameliorate that pollution at the source? If not prevented or ameliorated, what's the cost of that pollution to others? I'm guessing that these answers can be found in the paperwork supporting the regulation in the first place. I'm fairly confident that competing answers supported by sound science cannot be found in the present-day EPA. --Bob
-
- Posts: 4360
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:01 pm
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Chuckling a little bit at you going on about Externalities. One of Victor Davis Hanson's main themes is about how the politics of coastal California (of which you are a stereotypical example) externalizes all the nasty bits required to sustain a modern coastal California lifestyle.Bob78164 wrote:That may be. But that doesn't mean the regulation was unnecessary or that its expense was unwarranted. It may well mean that rural voters were perfectly willing to externalize the cost of polluting intermittent waterways because (by definition of "externalize") someone else would end up paying the price.Spock wrote:Spoken by the Atlanta liberal who has never met a regulation that he doesn't like. It is likely that the blowback against the Obama rule is one reason that Trump's margins were goosed in many rural areas.silverscreenselect wrote:
But the whole point of this regulation is that these things are in federal jurisdiction, and the water cleanliness is something that states, even if they were so inclined (which a number of them aren't due to lack of funding or a lack fo desire to take on business interests), can't always handle because a lot of pollution occurs before the water gets to that state.
And, as the article I cited indicated, a lot of the problem occurs in the waterways that Trump has just turned his back on.
How much pollution does enter other waterways and water supplies from these intermittent waterways? How much does it cost to prevent or ameliorate that pollution at the source? If not prevented or ameliorated, what's the cost of that pollution to others? I'm guessing that these answers can be found in the paperwork supporting the regulation in the first place. I'm fairly confident that competing answers supported by sound science cannot be found in the present-day EPA. --Bob
- Bob78164
- Bored Moderator
- Posts: 21696
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
- Location: By the phone
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Because collecting good scientific information takes time, as does enacting regulations. There's also a legal issue that has nothing to do with the science -- whether the law permits federal regulation of intermittent waterways no matter how good the cause. Analyzing that issue also takes time.Spock wrote:If the waters are so dirty and the rule was so necessary, why did the Obama team wait until 2015 (or so) to do the rule? Why not 5 years earlier?Bob78164 wrote:That may be. But that doesn't mean the regulation was unnecessary or that its expense was unwarranted. It may well mean that rural voters were perfectly willing to externalize the cost of polluting intermittent waterways because (by definition of "externalize") someone else would end up paying the price.Spock wrote:
Spoken by the Atlanta liberal who has never met a regulation that he doesn't like. It is likely that the blowback against the Obama rule is one reason that Trump's margins were goosed in many rural areas.
How much pollution does enter other waterways and water supplies from these intermittent waterways? How much does it cost to prevent or ameliorate that pollution at the source? If not prevented or ameliorated, what's the cost of that pollution to others? I'm guessing that these answers can be found in the paperwork supporting the regulation in the first place. I'm fairly confident that competing answers supported by sound science cannot be found in the present-day EPA. --Bob
None of this is an answer to my question. What does the science say? --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson
- SportsFan68
- No Scritches!!!
- Posts: 21113
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:36 pm
- Location: God's Country
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
I did not hate this regulation.
-- In Iroquois society, leaders are encouraged to remember seven generations in the past and consider seven generations in the future when making decisions that affect the people.
-- America would be a better place if leaders would do more long-term thinking. -- Wilma Mankiller
-- America would be a better place if leaders would do more long-term thinking. -- Wilma Mankiller
- flockofseagulls104
- Posts: 7993
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Well, I represent the large group of people who desire dirty, slimy and poisonous drinking water with several lethal chemicals mixed in.silverscreenselect wrote:I wonder how people who are interested in having clean drinking water feel about this.Spock wrote: The Trump Administration just made farmers of all political stripes very happy.
We want dirty air and contaminated land as well.
We have elected republicans to advance our cause, because we all know they want dirty water, air and earth, too. They also don't care about children or old folks, they hate people of color and gay people and are threatened by strong women. Especially Hillary.
We have rights, too!
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... All thought comes from the right wing noise machine(TM)... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything... Made the trump apologist and enabler playoffs... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd... Spiraling, Anti-Trans Bigot.. A Lunatic AND a Bigot.. Very Ignorant of the World in General... Sounds deranged... Fake Christian... Weird... has the mind of a child... has paranoid delusions... Simpleton... gullible idiot
- silverscreenselect
- Posts: 23523
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
- Contact:
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
That water you like to drink just might explain your thought processes.flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Well, I represent the large group of people who desire dirty, slimy and poisonous drinking water with several lethal chemicals mixed in.
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com
- jarnon
- Posts: 6378
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
- Location: Merion, Pa.
Re: Trump Repealing a Hated Obama Regulation
Sounds like Western farmers are getting what they want.
EPA moves toward rewriting Obama water rule
Are farmers happy about this too?
Senate agriculture panel passes farm bill with hemp legalization
Most of the press coverage here has been about food stamps, but Sen. Klobuchar has called the bill great for farmers in her state. Most farm state Senators agree; the agriculture committee approved it 20-1.
EPA moves toward rewriting Obama water rule
Are farmers happy about this too?
Senate agriculture panel passes farm bill with hemp legalization
Most of the press coverage here has been about food stamps, but Sen. Klobuchar has called the bill great for farmers in her state. Most farm state Senators agree; the agriculture committee approved it 20-1.
Слава Україні!
עם ישראל חי
עם ישראל חי