The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency proposed new regulations that would give the
agency control over more privately owned land than ever before. EPA issued the
regulations despite the Supreme Court ruling twice in recent years that federal
environmental officials had too expansively defined its Clean Water Act powers.
EPA Ignores Supreme Court Rebukes
EPA claims the Supreme Court’s decisions in SWANCC v. U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers (2001) and Rapanos v. United States (2006) created confusion regarding its newly proposed regulations. In SWANCC, the Court ruled federal environmental officials could not use what was known as the “migratory bird rule” to assert jurisdiction over isolated bodies of water. In Rapanos, the Court ruled federal environmental officials could not prohibit a private landowner from filling sand in an isolated wetland. In both cases, the Court emphasized the need for federal environmental officials to show the body of water at issue meets the Clean Water Act’s definition of “navigable waterway” that triggers federal jurisdiction.......“EPA says farmers should take the agency at its word that it will not enforce these regulations in a heavy-handed manner. In light of EPA’s longstanding record of heavy-handedness, arrogance, and abuse, however, farmers know better,” said Lehr……To Read More…..
My Take - It really is time to abolish the EPA, and Dr. Jay Lehr has outlined a five year plan on just how that should be done.
No comments:
Post a Comment