View Of Rouge Agency Depends On Your Perspective Of Government’s Role
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
Some believe that government agencies shouldn’t make up their own scope of authority -- instead following the laws passed by elected legislators. Then there are those who support the idea that agencies are there to regulate to achieve their desired results, whether they have to “creatively” expand their authority – or not.
These differing viewpoints are at the heart of the public considerations for the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee meeting this past week which brought the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to center stage.
As the constant target of the agency which operates beyond its legislated boundaries, agricultural representatives wanted to make it clear for those who are supposed to pass the laws that EPA’s game plan is not only inappropriate – their actions will have serious economic consequences and further damage our economy. This testimony before the House Committee is part of the overall effort by the American Farm Bureau Federation, launched at the organization’s annual meeting last month.
Whether overstepping authority for air or water quality, EPA’s zealous expansion of their reach and over-the-top (and outside the law) work of command and control is going to be met with a response. This resolution, adopted by American Farm Bureau Federation voting delegates sums up the point of view of where we stand. It also explains the legal pursuits that the organization is making in defense of agricultural producers who are being illegally attacked by the EPA in the Chesapeake Bay area.
Fighting back against a rouge agency isn’t always viewed as an acceptable response by those who believe that government can do no wrong when it comes to implementing their agenda. This editorial counter-attack by the Las Vegas Sun characterizes the view of the camp which considers any means acceptable – as long as their desired ends are achieved.
We’re supposed to believe that it is justifiable for an agency to invent its authority to regulate gases (including those we exhale when we breath) on the basis that a politically-correct science group has come to a conclusion with themselves that mankind is making the planet heat up. (Consensus of those who agree has now become the measurement of science, replacing what once required proven fact.)
Ideally, Congress will take charge of putting the Storm-Troopers of environmental regulation back in their place. Replacing the agency’s mission with a more solution-oriented philosophy would also go a long way in protecting the environment and the citizens they are supposed to be working for.
Some believe that government agencies shouldn’t make up their own scope of authority -- instead following the laws passed by elected legislators. Then there are those who support the idea that agencies are there to regulate to achieve their desired results, whether they have to “creatively” expand their authority – or not.
These differing viewpoints are at the heart of the public considerations for the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee meeting this past week which brought the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to center stage.
As the constant target of the agency which operates beyond its legislated boundaries, agricultural representatives wanted to make it clear for those who are supposed to pass the laws that EPA’s game plan is not only inappropriate – their actions will have serious economic consequences and further damage our economy. This testimony before the House Committee is part of the overall effort by the American Farm Bureau Federation, launched at the organization’s annual meeting last month.
Whether overstepping authority for air or water quality, EPA’s zealous expansion of their reach and over-the-top (and outside the law) work of command and control is going to be met with a response. This resolution, adopted by American Farm Bureau Federation voting delegates sums up the point of view of where we stand. It also explains the legal pursuits that the organization is making in defense of agricultural producers who are being illegally attacked by the EPA in the Chesapeake Bay area.
Fighting back against a rouge agency isn’t always viewed as an acceptable response by those who believe that government can do no wrong when it comes to implementing their agenda. This editorial counter-attack by the Las Vegas Sun characterizes the view of the camp which considers any means acceptable – as long as their desired ends are achieved.
We’re supposed to believe that it is justifiable for an agency to invent its authority to regulate gases (including those we exhale when we breath) on the basis that a politically-correct science group has come to a conclusion with themselves that mankind is making the planet heat up. (Consensus of those who agree has now become the measurement of science, replacing what once required proven fact.)
Ideally, Congress will take charge of putting the Storm-Troopers of environmental regulation back in their place. Replacing the agency’s mission with a more solution-oriented philosophy would also go a long way in protecting the environment and the citizens they are supposed to be working for.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 2/12/2011 9:52 AM 
Categories: Government
Tags: EPA Regulations Congress Global Warming Clean Water Act
Categories: Government
Tags: EPA Regulations Congress Global Warming Clean Water Act
Comments