EPA Budget Cuts: Trump’s Back Door Way to Destroy This Agency

In his first budget as POTUS, Donald Trump proposes massive budget cuts to EPA.


EPA Budget Cuts: Trump’s Back Door Way to Destroy This Agency

Many people, including myself, think that Donald Trump’s goal is to abolish the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency).  He is no different from any other member of the business community because most of them also want to eliminate the EPA.  His recent EPA budget cuts are evidence that the president’s eventual goal is to destroy this important government agency.

His proposed cuts will force the agency to cut some EPA jobs.  What better way to kill an organization than to dry up its funding sources?  The latest EPA budget cuts will force the agency to abandon many of its critical programs that protect us from unsafe air and water and other environmental dangers that we face.  Even though Donald Trump said in the election that one of his primary goals was to protect the American people, his actions of cutting the budget to the EPA shows that he is nothing but a liar.

Many people who are rather naïve might ask, “why abolish the EPA?”  After all, if his agency performs such a vital service, why would anyone want to abolish it? The answer is quite simple; because it’s a regulatory agency that gets in the way of the corporate “bottom line.”

People need to understand that Donald Trump is a laissez-faire capitalist who cares nothing about the well-being of the American people.  He is just another businessman whose primary goal is to make money by any means possible.  If abolishing a regulatory agency that interferes with profit is what needs to be done to make sure that big Capital continues to make money, then so be it.

Others might ask, “can the president abolish the EPA?”  The answer to that question is a bit more complicated, but the answer is no, he cannot do it on his own.  Legally, I think it would probably take an act of Congress to abolish the EPA.  However, by defunding an agency to the point where it ceases to work properly is just as good as destroying it.

Donald Trump knows this fact.  His cutting of EPA funding through massive budget cuts will make the agency ineffective and unable to act, therefore, effectively putting it out-of-the-way of big business.  These cuts are Donald Trump’s back door way of destroying the Environmental Protection Agency.

If his latest EPA budget cuts are not evidence of his eventual goal, I don’t know what is.  We must never forget, there is a method to Donald Trump’s madness.

 

Pentagon Grows, While EPA and State Dept. Shrink in Trump’s Budget

1 day ago Proposed E.P.A. budget cuts would eliminate funds for climate change research. Credit Al Hartmann/The Salt Lake Tribune, via Associated …

Trump’s EPA budget cuts would make many environmental laws …

16 hours ago President Donald Trump is fulfilling his vow to drain the swamp — if climate scientists and environmental regulators qualify as swamp dwellers.

 

 

The Hype For Natural Gas

At time when there is huge controversy over fracking for natural gas, I have noticed a disturbing trend in advertising where they are trying to sell us on the use of natural gas.


The Hype For Natural Gas

At a time when there is a huge controversy over fracking for natural gas, I have noticed a disturbing trend in advertising where they are to sell us on the use of natural gas.   In this publicity,  they are even stooping so low as to say that fracking is safe technology.  There is absolutely no truth in this advertising.  It badly misleads the public into thinking that using natural gas will save our environment and protect us from global warming; something that it certainly will not do.

For anyone who has paid the least bit of attention to widely publicized scientific findings and paid attention to environmentalists,  they should know that fracking is hardly safe.   In fact,  fracking for natural gas has been proven to be one of the most dangerous and polluting techniques ever devised.  It has only come under heavy public scrutiny within the last several years.

In my opinion, President Obama should have advocated more strongly for the use of the wind and solar power.  To his credit, he has supported the utilization of these things but just not strongly enough.  By now, the “green technology” industry, which holds enormous potential for economic development, should have progressed much farther than it has.  President Obama should have been more proactive in putting green technology into practice.  If he had, there would be no dispute about its value.

The president has also been one of the strongest advocates for reducing greenhouse gasses, which cause global warming. If he is sincere about his desire to reduce greenhouse gasses, he certainly should not have advocated for increased use of natural gas, if no other reason than it uses fracking.

Even though natural gas is the least polluting of the fossil fuels, using it doesn’t come without a price. When natural gas burns, it releases carbon dioxide, another harmful greenhouse gas. Since CO2 emissions have increased over the last several years, the last thing we need is, even more, use of natural gas

Even though it sounds like I’m putting down President Obama, in truth, I applaud his efforts at giving us a cleaner environment. I hope the Democratic Party continues his against greenhouse gasses after he leaves office later this month.  We all know that his successor, Donald Trump certainly won’t.  Trump has shown himself to be not lonely at and for fossil fuels, but a “climate change denier,” just like most other members of the GOP.

 

In my opinion, President Obama should have been stronger in encouraging the use of solar and wind power.  Donald Trump thinks windmills and other such “green technology” is ridiculous and unworthy of consideration.  No environmental good will come from the Trump presidency.  The only interest he shows in the environment is exploitation of it.

 

More Dangers of Fracking: Two More Carcinogens

More Dangers of Fracking: Two More Carcinogens Two more chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing (a.k.a. fracking) have been discovered to be carcinogenic, or causing cancer.  It is becoming increasingly obvious the dangers of fracking far outweigh its benefits.  Recently, two more chemicals used in fracking and been linked to cancer.  These …
Natural Gas (Fracking) – The New York Times

News about natural gas. Commentary and archival information about natural gas as fuel from The New York Times.

 

 

….

Is Donald Trump Smarter Than The Scientists About Global Warming?

The main reason that Donald Trump denies that global warming and climate change are a reality is because he thinks he’s smarter than most scientists.


Is Donald Trump Smarter Than The Scientists About Global Warming?

The main reason that Donald Trump denies that global warming and climate change are a reality is that he thinks he’s smarter than most scientists.  Despite that 97% of the scientific community says that global warming and climate change are a reality that needs to be dealt with, Donald Trump insists on denying that global warming is a reality.  He considers global warming to be a hoax, as he has said on many occasions.

Donald Trump also denies, despite what scientists say about it, that climate change and global warming are caused by human activity.  During his campaign, he made stupid jokes about global warming and climate change every opportunity.  Of course, considering the caliber of most of his supporters, the stupid jokes playing well to the crowd, mostly because they are as ignorant about climate change as their candidate.

Even though climate change is one of the most crucial issues we are confronted with, Donald Trump refuses even to say what type of environmental policy his administration will have.  I strongly suspect that no one in the Trump Administration will even bother to give it the thought it deserves.  They have allowed themselves to become as handcuffed by capitalism as the President-elect.  Hopefully, enough people will get angry about his environmental policy to raise as much hell as possible.  Global warming is an issue that we can ill afford to ignore.

Since we all have on the same planet and breathe the same air, it has always baffled me how people like Donald Trump refused to realize that protecting our environment is crucial to our survival.  Does our President-elect think that somehow he and other capitalists are immune to global warming/climate change?  They are such fools!

The signs of global warming hard too plentiful to ignore any longer, and Donald Trump should be the first to see it because it is his duty to do everything to protect the American people, even if it means sacrificing profit for him and his rich friends.  Since Donald Trump has shown himself to be nothing more than your typical selfish rich bastard, I seriously doubt that we will see any environmental policy, especially something that proactively deals with global warming.

Donald Trump has shown himself to support the use of fossil fuels.  As we know, the use of fossil fuels is the primary contributor to global warming.  We need a leader who is strong and capable of protecting us from global warming.  Donald Trump isn’t that person.

 

Global Warming: 2017 Articles, Facts, Causes & Effects

The latest articles and facts about global warming and its causes, plus a look at the effects of climate change: rising sea level and severe weather.
Donald Trump Will Be A Disaster For the Environment

Donald Trump Will Be A Disaster For the Environment When it comes to the environment, or a policy designed to protect it, Donald Trump will be a disaster.  Donald Trump’s view on environmental issues is what one might expect from a typical businessman; if it stands in the way of profit, …

 

Could the Dakota Access Pipeline Still Happen Under Trump?

President Barack Obama’s administration is expected to push through long-delayed safety measures for the nation’s sprawling network of oil pipelines in its final days, despite resistanc…

Source: Obama oil pipeline rules face uncertain future under Trump

 

Could The Dakota Access Pipeline Still Happen Under Trump?

During the last days of his presidency, President Barack Obama is trying valiantly to pass legislation that would increase oversight over this country’s system of oil pipelines. Included in these pieces of legislation is the Dakota Access Pipeline.  Recently, the president refused to grant an easement to Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), the company that is trying to build the pipeline.  President Obama, in one of the best decisions made during his presidency, killed the potentially hazardous Keystone XL pipeline earlier this year.

As you probably know, opponents of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline one day major victory when the federal government denied the necessary easement for Energy Transport Partners (ETP) to continue building the pipeline. For now, ETP is stuck in the mud, unless incoming President Trump decides to pull them out, even if by trickery, deception, or just plain lawbreaking.

With a new administration coming into power, I hope people aren’t celebrating victory over the Dakota Access Pipeline too early so that they let their guard down. I don’t trust Donald Trump on anything, especially something done by President Obama. Trump has never shown himself to be a fan of government regulation, unless he benefits from it. He is your typical Republican businessman.

Even though federal oversight and regulation over this nation’s ever-increasing system of oil pipelines should have been years ago, I applaud President Obama’s efforts to protect our environment. There have been an increased number of accidental spills on these pipelines for the past several years, so increase regulation is necessary. The big question is, will Donald Trump derail this regulation and oversight?

 

Understanding the Controversy Behind the Dakota Access Pipeline …

Sep 14, 2016 The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline continues to make headlines. Yesterday, Energy Transfer Partners, the developer behind the $3.8 …
North Dakota Oil Pipeline Battle: Who’s Fighting and Why – The New …

Aug 26, 2016 A look at how the fight over the Dakota Access pipeline has become an environmental and cultural flash point, drawing thousands of protesters …

 

New Interior Secretary, Cathy McMorris Rodgers: An Environmental Disaster

Uh-oh.

Source: Donald Trump’s interior secretary pick doesn’t want to combat climate change

New Interior Secretary, Cathy McMorris Rodgers: An Environmental Disaster

Cathy McMorris RodgersIn case any of you are naïve enough to think that the Trump administration will do anything to combat climate change, you are very wrong. His appointment of Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) as the new Secretary of the Interior implies that our environment will probably get worse, not better.

Any environmental activist will tell you that Cathy McMorris Rodgers is probably one of the biggest climate change deniers in Congress. From what I’ve read, Donald Trump could not have made a worse choice for the cabinet-level position of the person who is supposed to protect our environment. I cannot see this particular person doing anything to protect anyone except the industrialists who make a profit by raping the environment.

Here are just a few of the things that Cathy McMorris Rodgers has said and done that shows that she will probably do very little to protect the environment or fight against climate change.

  • Is quoted as saying, “we believe Al Gore deserves an F in science an A in creative writing.”
  • Was praised by the Americans For Prosperity, a Koch brothers-backed super PAC for opposing a cap-and-trade carbon pricing system for reducing emissions.
  • Voted three times against a resolution acknowledging that “climate change is happening human beings are a major reason for it.”
  • Cosponsored a House bill to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating carbon emissions.
  • Voted against letting the interior secretary consider climate change when setting policy.
  • McMorris Rodgers has a 4% lifetime rating from the League of Conservation Voters (LCV)

Considering this list of negative “accomplishments” attributed to Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, she is hardly the person who should be in charge of protecting our environment. She has already shown herself to be biased against climate change; something that I consider to be one of the worst problems confronting our planet. Climate change is an issue that has already started affecting people’s lives in a negative way.

There is no way that I will ever believe that it is a coincidence that our air is getting increasingly more polluted, we are experiencing droughts in parts of the world that have never been prone to droughts, and places like Alaska have experienced heat waves. It has been proven that our planet is getting warmer, and 97% of the scientific community attributes climate change to human activity.

Having someone who is so obviously biased against, or who is unwilling to consider these points are valid is hardly someone we need as Secretary of the Interior.

 

Trump to pick Rep. McMorris Rodgers for Interior secretary | TheHill

3 days ago Tags Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Donald Trump, Susan Brooks, Sally Jewell, Diane Black, Paul Ryan. Please enable JavaScript to view the …
Cathy McMorris-Rodgers: Republican Partisanship Instead of People

Partisanship instead of people: McMorris is a career politician who chose advancement in the Republican Party over jobs & healthcare for Eastern Washington.

 

UPDATE: A Small Victory for Activists Against the Dakota Access Pipeline

“It’s the first glimmer of hope, of good news, that we’ve had out here for weeks—months.”

Source: Activists say Dakota Access Pipeline could be put on hold for 30 days

A Small Victory for Activists Against the Dakota Access Pipeline

Activists who oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline, in North Dakota, have won a small but significant victory.  The US Army Corps of Engineers, the primary governing body for this controversial project have ordered a 30-day halt in any further construction of this potentially very harmful project that activists have opposed for years.

The activists, composed largely of members of The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and many other supporters have fought this project for years, saying that the current route of the Dakota Access Pipeline desecrates sacred tribal locations and burial grounds.  Most importantly, they also claim that the pipeline threatens their water supply because the present route of the pipeline is upstream from the Standing Rock Reservation.

So far, Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the Dakota Access Pipeline hasn’t received the necessary easement that would allow it to dig under the Missouri River.  Col. John W.  Henderson from the US Army Corps of Engineers says he will wait thirty days to grant the easement.  President Obama stated that he would urge the Army Corps of Engineers to reconsider the present route of the pipeline, rerouting it away from the Standing Rock tribe’s reservation to make sure that the tribe’s water supply not be put in danger.

Many people, especially activists, say that this delay will cost the company enough money to stop the project entirely and make it obsolete.  Energy Transfer Partners claims that they are only five days away from starting to dig under the Missouri River.  As one can imagine, stockholders and others who stand to make a profit from the building of this pipeline are not pleased.

On the other hand, I seriously doubt that the activists give a damn about whether Energy Transfer Partners makes a profit.  I know I sure don’t!  Given that this oil that the Dakota Access Pipeline will transport has been under the earth’s surface for thousands of years already, it will be just fine, if he stays there forever.

UPDATE: Since this story was first written, the US Army Corps of Engineers has refused to grant the necessary easement to the company building the Dakota Access Pipeline. This means that the oil company will not be allowed to build the pipeline across the Standing Rock Sioux land, which will protect their water supply from potential harm.

Some people are questioning whether or not President-elect Donald Trump will allow the halting of the easement to happen.

However, this should be viewed as a major victory for not only the Standing Rock Sioux but for anyone who cares about protecting the environment. GOOD NEWS!

 

The Super Twisted History Of The Dakota Access Pipeline …

Sep 23, 2016 The Super Twisted History Of The Dakota Access Pipeline. “They’ve been using backdoor process to get the pipeline approved,” an activist …

The Obama Administration and the Bakken Oil Field

The Obama Administration And the Bakken Oil Field The environmental policy of the Obama administration has always been a mystery to me.  On the one hand, the president says that we must end our dependency on fossil fuels, particularly oil and natural gas, yet when it comes to controversial issues like …

 

A Small Victory for Activists Against the Dakota Access Pipeline

“It’s the first glimmer of hope, of good news, that we’ve had out here for weeks—months.”

Source: Activists say Dakota Access Pipeline could be put on hold for 30 days

A Small Victory for Activists Against the Dakota Access Pipeline

Activists who oppose the Dakota Access Pipeline, in North Dakota, have won a small but significant victory.  The US Army Corps of Engineers, the primary governing body for this controversial project have ordered a 30-day halt in any further construction of this potentially very harmful project that activists have opposed for years.

The activists, composed largely of members of The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and many other supporters have fought this project for years, saying that the current route of the Dakota Access Pipeline desecrates sacred tribal locations and burial grounds.  Most importantly, they also claim that the pipeline threatens their water supply because the present route of the pipeline is upstream from the Standing Rock Reservation.

So far, Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the Dakota Access Pipeline hasn’t received the necessary easement that would allow it to dig under the Missouri River.  Col. John W.  Henderson from the US Army Corps of Engineers says he will wait thirty days to grant the easement.  President Obama stated that he would urge the Army Corps of Engineers to reconsider the present route of the pipeline, rerouting it away from the Standing Rock tribe’s reservation to make sure that the tribe’s water supply not be put in danger.

Many people, especially activists, say that this delay will cost the company enough money to stop the project entirely and make it obsolete.  Energy Transfer Partners claims that they are only five days away from starting to dig under the Missouri River.  As one can imagine, stockholders and others who stand to make a profit from the building of this pipeline are not pleased.

On the other hand, I seriously doubt that the activists give a damn about whether Energy Transfer Partners makes a profit.  I know I sure don’t!  Given that this oil that the Dakota Access Pipeline will transport has been under the earth’s surface for thousands of years already, it will be just fine, if he stays there forever.

 

The Super Twisted History Of The Dakota Access Pipeline …

Sep 23, 2016 The Super Twisted History Of The Dakota Access Pipeline. “They’ve been using backdoor process to get the pipeline approved,” an activist …
The Obama Administration and the Bakken Oil Field

The Obama Administration And the Bakken Oil Field The environmental policy of the Obama administration has always been a mystery to me.  On the one hand, the president says that we must end our dependency on fossil fuels, particularly oil and natural gas, yet when it comes to controversial issues like …