Eliminate it.

Argument:

Like many government agencies the Environmental Protection Agency was formed to meet a specific purpose.  Its purpose was to protect the quality of our land, water and air.  But after imposing itself initially in the private sector and achieving good results the agency began to push new programs and regulate more and more outcomes until it grew to proportions that have placed an unreasonable burden on manufacturers.  I am pleased to have played a part in the improved stewardship over our natural resources that occurred in the forest products industry during the 1970’s.  Programs were initiated and capital was spent to ensure the water we put back into the rivers was cleaner than the water we initially took from the rivers.  We developed the science and the methods for cleaning nitrates, the sulfurs and other substances from our smokestacks.   We managed our land with the purpose to regenerate the forests we harvested for the production of dimension lumber and for our pulp mills.  Marvelous results were achieved not just in the 1970’s but prior and subsequent to then as well in managing these forests to the benefit of all.    

The agency has served its initial purpose and as such it should be eliminated.  The government must be reactive rather than proactive in maintaining good stewardship of the land.   No large bureaucratic agency is required to monitor air and water quality and no large independent federal agency is necessary to monitor illegal dumping of hazardous materials  or reforestation on our lands.   These inspections must continue but the EPA is not the only organization capable of meeting the goals of these inspections.  The law is already clear.  Industry may not dump its waste into our environment.  Heavy penalties, including criminal penalties are within reason but the responsibility for levying fines and exacting criminal penalties must be left to the courts and the gathering of evidence of malfeasance can be transferred to another agency within the Department of the Interior. 

A problem with many governmental organizations, in fact most organizations in general, is that they are created for a single purpose but upon reaching even a modicum of success the organization begins to find new things to do.  Initially those new things appear reasonable and there is then a further extension of power to that organization.  It grows.  The EPA has grown to gargantuan proportions and has power well beyond what was originally intended.  The EPA has perpetuated themselves and they have become more important than the problem they were originally formed to resolve.

Recently the EPA has indicated that it will enact carbon emission rules that include standards by industry and essentially enact Cap and Trade regulations under their own authority, without Congressional approval.  Taxation must be reserved for the Congress.  When an agency has grown so large that it can bypass the Congress the agency has become a threat to our freedoms as well as to our economy.   The government must not be allowed to establish standards that tell the public the kind of light bulbs they may use, the hours they may use their air conditioners, the type of car they must drive or the types of other products they may buy at market.  The government most certainly must not be allowed to dictate an approved carbon footprint for any citizen or any industry.   We must expect industry to abide by air, land and water quality standards but we must not stifle industry by laying onerous regulations upon them particularly when these regulations have not been debated in the Congress.  The EPA has acted in a manner as someone who has been given a blank check by the Congress and by the courts.  The EPA has become too large and too powerful.  The only way to resolve this is to dissolve the agency and replace only those powers the agency was originally provided within the confines of another existing government agency.  I propose the Department of the Interior.    

The EPA budget for 2011 is $10 billion.   http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/budget/2011/2011bib.pdf  Although the entire budget will not be saved if inspections currently performed by the EPA are transferred to another agency, a good portion of the budget will be saved and never be taken from the Treasury.   

When agencies grow to such a large size they become politicized.  Environmentalists should be free to petition government and to petition the courts to expose organizations who are not abiding by the laws passed by our Congress.  They must not be allowed unfettered access to dictate to industry where they may drill for oil, cut timber or mine ore.  Industry is currently caught within a web of bureaucracy intent on inhibiting production of fuels, metals and lumber.  There is an unreasonable notion that only the environmentalists care about our natural resources or know what is best for our environment.  Corporations must be free to harvest their resources without burdensome delays.  By so doing, jobs will be created in oil and gas production, mining, timber and within other manufacturers.