It is no wonder Conspiracy Theories abound about the Federal Government exerting martial law type authority over Americans – the most recent being Jade Helm 15 (debunked by Justin Smith). President Barack Hussein Obama has issued the old pen and paper action giving the Federal Government power over Private Property via the bureaucracy of the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) managing water. Justin Smith has the story exposing once again the nefariousness of the Leftist-in-Chief.
JRH 6/1/15
**************************
The Ditch Rule
Water and Oppressive Power
By Justin O. Smith
Sent: 5/30/2015 9:29 PM
Barack Obama has once again exhibited his despotic nature by enacting the Environmental Protection Agency's purposefully vague Waters of the United States [WOTUS] "Rule" on May 27, 2015, through executive order, which ignores previous Congressional and Supreme Court actions blocking this rule for good reason. This "rule" amounts to an unrestrained federal intrusion, that is nothing more than a power grab for control over Americans' privately owned lands, rather than an added effort towards improving and providing clean water standards.
While the EPA already has a great deal of power under the Clean Water Act of 1972, this new Waters "Rule" gives the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers massive sweeping powers and broad authority over all the water in the United States, long claimed by the EPA, to limit pollution through a new revised definition of "navigable waterways," to include traditional navigable water and interstate water, such as the Mississippi and Columbia Rivers and the Chesapeake Bay, and natural man-made streams, lakes, ponds and wetlands. They also claim the authority to govern impoundments, canals and ditches.
In July 2014, Gina McCarthy, EPA director, stated: "We are talking about ditches that used to be streams and still act like streams. They may not have running water, but still act like streams," adding, "I never expected to say the word 'ditch' this many times in my entire life ... ."
McCarthy recently asserted that these new powers would not interfere with private property rights or land use. McCarthy also suggested that the rule would make it easier "to identify protected waters" and that these protections would now be "consistent with the law."
What "law" was McCarthy referencing?
Congress voted against this rule 262-152 last year, and the Senate voted against it 59-40 [See Also HERE] on a non-binding amendment to the Senate budget resolution as a test of support for blocking WOTUS. The U.S. Supreme Court has twice questioned the breadth of just the EPA's powers decreed under the Clean Water Act alone. So Obama simply went ahead and unilaterally circumvented the will of the people.
No one should rest comfortably on McCarthy's assurances that concerns have been met, since, as noted by Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman, the EPA has a long record of blatantly lying in the past. The Waters Rule's own language seems to contradict McCarthy, because the vague term "significant nexus" allows the EPA alone to determine if a farmer's ditch affects some tributary to a regulated navigable waterway or regulated body of water.
One of the most controversial aspects of the rule is the provision that allows the EPA to regulate wetlands on farms and on the yards of private suburban homes, by designating them "regional treasures." In the past, this "rule" has been used to force private land owners to relinquish property to the federal government, which demonstrates the extent of the EPA's abuse of power and supports calls to abolish this rule.
Groups that throw their full support behind this rule, such as the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council, want these EPA rules to be as broad as possible. They view this through simplistic logic, as they insist that all water sources and tributaries must be "protected" in order to protect the larger bodies of water. Ironically, most small bodies of water have already been regulated by the state and local government agencies for many years.
Small businesses were inappropriately excluded from the rule-making process, and yet, these businesses will be most dramatically impacted by this outrageous expansion of the EPA's and the Army Corps of Engineers' power and authority, although private property owners too will be heavily burdened unnecessarily with bureaucratic red-tape. If one fails to secure permits to perform potentially polluting activities, such as tilling or building, near bodies of water, a person can be sued by the EPA, environmental advocates and even other private citizens over violations of this new Waters "Rule."
Expressing his concerns, Daren Bakst, an agriculture expert and senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, stated: "This will be devastating to private property rights. It's an attack on private property rights. Most people don't have the money to pay for all these permits."
The U.S. House of Representatives understands the many dangers to be found in the Waters of the United States Rule, and anticipating Obama's action, they passed the Regulatory Integrity Protection Act (HR 1732) on May 12th, in order to force the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to cease the implementation of the Water Rule and to consult with the states and industries before writing a new proposal. The 261-155 vote included "yes" votes from 24 Democrats, like Jim Cooper (Tenn) and Gwen Graham (Fla), of whom two sit on the Energy and Commerce Committee and eight on the Agriculture Committee.
While Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) promises that SB 1140 will "halt [the] EPA's unprecedented land grab" this summer, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Farm Bureau have lawsuits underway to challenge the EPA. Most legal experts expect that this battle for control of America's waters will go before the Supreme Court. And based on precedents set in the Supreme Court, it is already pretty obvious that Obama and the EPA are going too far and exceeding their authority.
Everybody wants clean water, but the federal government and the Progressive fascists should not expect nor believe that they have the authority to regulate every drop of water that falls on America; and yet, Obama has positioned the fascists within the EPA to do this very thing, exerting raw, oppressive control over private lands, through his executive order which clearly transgresses legal boundaries set for the EPA by the courts and Congress. Despite his claim of "historic commitments to clean water," his new "rule" deals more with regulating land use than protecting America's valuable water resources, and it is a serious threat to economic growth, property rights and states' sovereignty. And as such, America demands an end to this overreach of power and the dismantling and eradication of the Waters of the United States "Rule."
By Justin O. Smith
_____________________________
Edited by John R. Houk
All links are by the Editor. Any text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.
© Justin O. Smith
No comments:
Post a Comment