It Is Time To Put The ‘Limited’ Back In Limited Government – And Abolishing The EPA Is A Good Place To Start

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

The constitutional republic that our founders intended to create has become a monster, and it is time to tame that monster and restore the federal government to its proper size and scope. The left loves big government, because it allows them to impose their progressive vision of how the world should work on all the rest of us. This is why so many control freaks are drawn to liberal politics like moths to a flame. Power and control are very addicting drugs, and those that crave these things on the left are never satisfied. That is one of the reasons why the federal government just keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger. If our constitutional republic is going to survive, we have got to start putting the “limited” back in limited government.

 

Our forefathers tried to guarantee that the federal government would always be less powerful than the states by making the Tenth Amendment abundantly clear…

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

I don’t see how anyone could possibly misunderstand that, but over the decades the left has worked very hard to make the Tenth Amendment as meaningless as possible.

If we want to see the Tenth Amendment restored, we are going to have to be willing to fight hard in the court system, in statehouses all over America, and in the halls of Congress.

And a good place for Congress to start would be to abolish the EPA. It is one of the federal agencies that is most wildly out of control, and fortunately there are a few good members of Congress that get this.

On February 3rd, U.S. Representative Matt Gaetz introduced a one sentence bill in the House of Representatives that would abolish the EPA at the end of next year

Introduced by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL1), H.R. 861 totals a mere one sentence: “The Environmental Protection Agency shall terminate on December 31, 2018.” That’s the same date of termination as another Republican bill to end the Education Department, which GovTrack Insider also recently covered. Gaetz is serving his first term in Congress and this is the first bill he’s ever introduced.

I would certainly vote for such a bill in a heartbeat, because as Gaetz has explained, the EPA is suffocating small businesses all over America

Gaetz, a freshman, took aim at the EPA in a leaked email, obtained by The Huffington Post, saying Americans are “drowning in regulations” enforced by the agency.

“Our small businesses cannot afford to cover the costs associated with compliance, too often leading to closed doors and unemployed Americans,” Gaetz wrote in the email, which was circulated among possible co-sponsors.

If enacted, the bill would will give power back to the states and local governments, Gaetz said.

“To better protect the environment we should abolish the EPA and downstream resources to states for more effective & efficient protection,” Gaetz said in a Facebook post Friday.

Today, the EPA is packed with leftists that love to promote their political agendas by constantly coming up with even more business-killing rules and regulations. These unelected bureaucrats have been on a rampage in recent years, and most of what they are doing is unconstitutional according to the Tenth Amendment.

Here in Idaho, the EPA has been a thorn in the side of miners, loggers and small businesses for decades, and it is a problem that has grown worse over time. At the moment, there appears to be little hope that the bill to shut down the EPA could get through both chambers of Congress, but that doesn’t mean that we will stop trying.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has taken some positive steps to try to rein in the EPA. The following comes from Time Magazine

But that doesn’t mean that the EPA is safe. In fact, some of the agency’s defenders worry that it faces a far more stealthy threat of being hollowed out. President Trump’s choice to run the agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, is known for targeting the agency with more than a dozen lawsuits.

Environmental groups and policymakers fear Pruitt will dismantle many of the agency’s core functions methodically over time rather than trying to knock out the agency with one fell swoop.

He will almost certainly try to unravel the Clean Power Plan, President Obama’s primary regulation aimed at addressing climate change, a multi-year process that could require careful reconsideration of legal and scientific arguments. He might also weaken—or shutter altogether—the EPA’s enforcement office, according to an Inside EPA report.

Some of you may think that I don’t care about the environment since I want the EPA shut down.

That is not true at all. I believe that we are facing some huge environmental problems and that we should all do more to take care of the planet that we share.

But I also believe that the people of all 50 states should be able to determine how their own natural resources should be managed.

The EPA has become a highly politicized organization, and it has become one of the favorite tools of the left for moving the “green agenda” forward. And of course this “green agenda” is being promoted on a global scale by the United Nations.

Have you ever heard of Agenda 21? Well, it has been given a makeover and it is now known as “Agenda 2030”. When it was first launched in 2015, Agenda 2030 was being touted as a “new universal Agenda” for humanity. The following information about Agenda 2030 comes from the official UN website

This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development.

All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan. We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet. We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind.

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets which we are announcing today demonstrate the scale and ambition of this new universal Agenda. They seek to build on the Millennium Development Goals and complete what these did not achieve. They seek to realize the human rights of all and to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. They are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental.

If you read over the 17 sustainable development goals which you can find right here, you will quickly notice that they cover virtually every form of human activity imaginable.

That is become the “green agenda” is really just a nice way of introducing “global governance” to an unsuspecting public.

The leftist control freaks at the UN literally want to closely regulate all human activity on the entire planet, and they are telling us that they need to do this in order “to save the world”.

But as I discussed yesterday, we aren’t going to allow the left to steal our country from us, and we are going to greatly resist all attempts to erode American sovereignty.

 
  • b99998532a

    The Green Agenda is really green. They never address discarded batteries or florescent light bulbs. These truly are things that an environmentalist should be concerned with.

    • epn

      The real issue is the suppression of electric cars and high-mileage cars like they have in Europe. European cars get far better mileage but they won’t allow them in the “land of the free.” We could have a lot cleaner air.

      The other issue is wilderness destruction. If nothing is done to stop urban sprawl or a big reduction in the birth rate, there will be no wilderness left in the future.

      Florescent light bulbs is not a big issue if you’re referring to the mercury. You get a lot more mercury from a flu shot.

      • Joel W

        Um, flu shot is not a good argument. Considering there are myriad people who don’t get the shot for that exact reason. And because they don’t work. As for cleaner air, we could have much cleaner air if the government stopped poisoning us with SRM aerosols (chemtrails).

        • conservative eunuch

          Agree totally.
          The chemtrails also have powdered aluminum which is flammable. They spray it over forests & that might be a contributing factor in the big fires.

          • Joel W

            Also a neurotoxin (think dementia & autism) & carcinogen. Along with barium & strontium, both carcinogens. And whatever else they may include that hasn’t been found out about yet. Chemical warfare on the entire populace IMO. Plus it contaminates literally everything. Food, air & water. Organic has no meaning anymore because of this.

  • “The left loves big government, because it allows them to impose their progressive vision of how the world should work on all the rest of us. This is why so many control freaks are drawn to liberal politics”

    Umm, hellooo — religion and [hatred of] abortion are not the primary bastions of control freaks trying to impose beliefs upon “the rest of us”???

    Please get some self-awareness before pulling that ignorant nonsense again. It’s fine to hate the EPA, but let’s not pretend that imposing pro-Xtian and anti-abortion rules upon the world isn’t precisely why *certain non-Democrats* enter politics.

    • b99998532a

      Just be happy that you weren’t aborted.

      • Had [you or] I been aborted, there would be no being happy over not being aborted, as that would require consciousness — something not present in those who never came to be.

        The same goes for your/my parents not doing the deed nine months prior to you/me being born. Had that particular sperm not met that particular egg, you/I would never have come into existence. Simple and as arbitrary as that.

    • epn

      There needs to be a balance between liberals & conservatives because both groups have many opposing issues they like to control people on.

      Go to far right & we get a religious theocracy & many religion-based laws like the Puritans, go to far left & we get socialism or mild communism.

      Each form of government is often equally undesirable.

      • “There needs to be a balance between liberals & conservatives because […]”

        Agreed. It didn’t always used to be this way. People and politicians were far, far more centrist not too long ago. Your candidate would lose and you’d shrug and say ‘darn it, maybe next time’ and go have some beers with friends.

        Now people are zealots, like sports freaks defending their favorite team. “MY TEAM RUUUULES, UR TEAM SUXX!”

        I know we’re supposed to want the United States to remain united, but it might be better if there was some equitable split. Impossible, I know.

        • conservative eunuch

          You too seem really upset Donald won. They’re just Rothschild puppets.
          As for me alcohol is kinda hard to stomach. Alcohol can hurt my head unless I’m on a full stomach or yeast it first (yeast eats alcohol). 3unucks can’t really tolerate alcohol or rollercoasters. Sorry for being off subject.

          • Anyone with a brain or a conscience is really upset that Crooked Donald won.

            So, yes, your assumption is valid this time.

            Also, you’re not sorry for being off-topic; you intentionally do it too frequently to be sorry about doing it.

  • DJohn1

    The problem with all big agencies is regulation. The EPA has over ten truck loads full of regulations and laws some contradicting one another.
    By rights that should make the agency unconstitutional.

    loads

  • greanfinisher

    Actually, the EPA was Richard Nixon’s brain child, and it was the worst blunder that he made during his administration. The elimination of the EPA can’t happen soon enough as far as I’m concerned, and I detest the CAFE standards even more.

  • Zlatko Milanovic

    Ya, stupid EPA. Who needs clean water and air?

    • epn

      They don’t care about either. You haven’t heard the story about the EPA dumping toxic waste in the river? Or watched Who Killed the Electric Car?

      Big government answers to CORPORATIONS, not the clueless peasants who fund the corporations.

    • Joel W

      Every state, as in all 50 of them, have a state level version of the EPA. The way the Constitution defines it. Those state level agencies are more than capable of doing the job.

  • SantosGarcia

    Every state of the union, their populace and duly elected officials know far better how to preserve their respective resources, environment, and rational business development without the imposition of Federal draconian measures that defy reason! It’s time to put an end to the NWO Globalist plot of wealth distribution designed to bring America down.
    https://zionsgate.wordpress.com/2007/07/04/praying-for-the-healing-of-america/

  • iris

    Guess this isn’t going to get a response, as I suspected.

    • Well, sockpuppet, your “suspicions” haven’t been shown to be too bright yet, have they? My comment is awaiting moderation still. The only questionable terms I used were the three terms for pre-born babies, so that’s the moderator’s hangup, not mine.

      • iris

        I was stating facts, as well as the observation that the Nazi understanding of whom is to be deemed human, is one step away from denying the consciousness of the fetus. I don’t call people sockpuppets. I won’t be communicating with you again.