Trump Wants The EPA gone!!

[owebo]

No, I want a race to the top as the industrial leader of the world....you say this will sacrifice health but offer no example besides some local issues or poorly fun .gov facilities...

i said that, with prudent regulation, industry and worker safety and the integrity of the environment can all co exist. What cannot happen is flushing the very notion of environmental protection and workplace safety down the tubes for the short game of polluting jobs.

Just what is a polluting job?

In the near term, energy production. So long as we are attached at the hip with fossil fuels, a non renewable resource, there will be pollution.

And the ancillary industries like polymers and plastics, chemicals and metals have nasty tendencies to pollute heavily.

We need regulations to protect the neighborhood and those who work in it.

Just waking up in the morning causes pollution....

Solar is terrible on the environment...

I am not sure what plastics, chemicals, or metals you think are polluting....

You speak in generalizations, like your pre programmed with liberal bullshit....

We need less EPA to protect people's jobs so they have neighborhoods to go home to...

You would sell out everything for the short game. Conservatives cannot see two minutes down the road.

Jobs are a long term play.....

What do you intend for people to do for work once you eliminated all their jobs to feel good about nothing?

 

[bripat9643]

I have no problem keeping the EPA, but they need to be stripped of enacting any regulations without an affirmative vote of Congress first. Nothing in the Constitution gives unelected bureaucrats authority to make law.

Congressional approval would render any agency moot. Do you know how EPA regs are established? Do you know what NIOSH is?

No, I really dont know to much about them. I know they can be....picky and chicken shit. Im a believer of protecting our air, land and water. Im know that left up to the corporations, they will pollute, they have proved that.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

 

[bripat9643]

No, I want a race to the top as the industrial leader of the world....you say this will sacrifice health but offer no example besides some local issues or poorly fun .gov facilities...

i said that, with prudent regulation, industry and worker safety and the integrity of the environment can all co exist. What cannot happen is flushing the very notion of environmental protection and workplace safety down the tubes for the short game of polluting jobs.

Just what is a polluting job?

In the near term, energy production. So long as we are attached at the hip with fossil fuels, a non renewable resource, there will be pollution.

And the ancillary industries like polymers and plastics, chemicals and metals have nasty tendencies to pollute heavily.

We need regulations to protect the neighborhood and those who work in it.

Just waking up in the morning causes pollution....

Solar is terrible on the environment...

I am not sure what plastics, chemicals, or metals you think are polluting....

You speak in generalizations, like your pre programmed with liberal bullshit....

We need less EPA to protect people's jobs so they have neighborhoods to go home to...

You would sell out everything for the short game. Conservatives cannot see two minutes down the road.

The goal of zero pollution simply isn't technically or economically feasible, but so long as we produce any pollution at all dumbasses like you will be whining for more controls on pollution.

 

[Nosmo King]

Congressional approval would render any agency moot. Do you know how EPA regs are established? Do you know what NIOSH is?

No, I really dont know to much about them. I know they can be....picky and chicken shit. Im a believer of protecting our air, land and water. Im know that left up to the corporations, they will pollute, they have proved that.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

 

[Mr. H.]

No, I really dont know to much about them. I know they can be....picky and chicken shit. Im a believer of protecting our air, land and water. Im know that left up to the corporations, they will pollute, they have proved that.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

Could you shed some light as to why the EPA is concerned with air pollutants associated with oil and natural gas drilling and production yet care nothing about agricultural effluent such as cattle and hog operations?

 

[Unkotare]

There is NO EPA in china

Yes, there is.

 

[Unkotare]

... You need to take a trip to china.

Have you ever?

 

[bripat9643]

No, I really dont know to much about them. I know they can be....picky and chicken shit. Im a believer of protecting our air, land and water. Im know that left up to the corporations, they will pollute, they have proved that.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

Everything you know is bullshit:

USA TODAY - When Removing Asbestos Makes No Sense​

Asbestos removal, the biggest environmental cleanup project in U.S. history, has cost an estimated $50 billion over the past 20 years. It has forced schools to lay off teachers, caused owners to abandon buildings and added considerably to the cost of remodeling many houses.

But one thing this colossal investment hasn't done is produce a measurable improvement in the public's health.

A USA TODAY investigation has found incontrovertible scientific evidence that asbestos in buildings creates a cancer risk so low that it barely can be measured. A person who spends a career inside a building rich with asbestos materials is more likely to die of a lightning bolt, a bee sting or a toothpick lodged in the throat than an asbestos-related cancer.

Despite the minimal risk, asbestos continues to be removed from US. buildings at a cost of about $3 billion a year, largely because the risks were overestimated two decades ago and new scientific evidence has never changed the public perception that asbestos in any form is deadly.​

 

[owebo]

No, I really dont know to much about them. I know they can be....picky and chicken shit. Im a believer of protecting our air, land and water. Im know that left up to the corporations, they will pollute, they have proved that.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

No, I really dont know to much about them. I know they can be....picky and chicken shit. Im a believer of protecting our air, land and water. Im know that left up to the corporations, they will pollute, they have proved that.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

Well child, I do know you are an egotistical liberal, so that makes understanding you very easy....and that you are not that smart, as evidenced by your posts.

A 24 year engineer is not all that impressive to me and if you want to compare size, I have over 30 years with 2 degrees, a BS in environmental science, and a BS in mechanical engineering.....so.....

So, you can stop huffing and puffing as we have observed, it makes you look the fool...

Now let me make an assumption, are you a government employee? From your posts you seem to know your job, but it seems you confuse your jobs value to you and the value of your work to society. It seems your in a position that makes you a parasite on industry and other peoples success and progress.....

Well, anyway....huff and puff some more and I will hand you your ass far worse than I did above.....

Or, you can check your liberal at the door with me,,and we can discuss PE things...

You see, that's the awesome thing about being a conservative, I gave you choices, and now you're forced to make a choice, all on your own....we will await your decision....

 

[NYcarbineer]

What did the poster say?

You have no clue....

Hey asshole, read:

the other poster said:

"To solve environmental problem, we need to eliminate the government."

Yes, he said 'eliminate government'. If you eliminate government, there are no laws against dumping toxins, therefore dumping toxins anywhere becomes legal.

Got it?

What company will do that? Do you have a real career? Or do you flip burgers?

Every company will do that that thinks they can gain an advantage. Based on the other poster's scheme I could in fact dump my trash in his front yard without legal liability.

Which companies?

Companies like this:

EPA fines coal producer $27.5 million for Appalachian pollution

In bripat's vision of the world, none of the above pollution would be illegal.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

Picky and chicken shit. Let's take a look at one little piece of one little regulation. Asbestos containing building materials are any building material containing at least 1% asbestiform minerals. Floor tile and mastic, window glazing compound, plaster, roofing materials, transite, and that's not counting spray on acoustic material, pipe insulation, boiler and furnace insulation.

NIOSH (National Institutes of Occupational Health and Safety) conducts extensive testing to determine safe levels of exposure for hazardous and toxic materials. The EPA and OSHA generally regulate permissible exposure limits at 50% of NIOSH regulations. Why water it down so much, especially when worker health and safety and environmental contamination are in the balance? Because EPA regulations are under public comment stipulations. And it's the lobbies to from private industry polluters who testify at the public comment hearings.

Picky and chicken shit EPA regulators know tow to the lobbies to on a daily basis.

And Conservatives want all that to evaporate.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

Well child, I do know you are an egotistical liberal, so that makes understanding you very easy....and that you are not that smart, as evidenced by your posts.

A 24 year engineer is not all that impressive to me and if you want to compare size, I have over 30 years with 2 degrees, a BS in environmental science, and a BS in mechanical engineering.....so.....

So, you can stop huffing and puffing as we have observed, it makes you look the fool...

Now let me make an assumption, are you a government employee? From your posts you seem to know your job, but it seems you confuse your jobs value to you and the value of your work to society. It seems your in a position that makes you a parasite on industry and other peoples success and progress.....

Well, anyway....huff and puff some more and I will hand you your ass far worse than I did above.....

Or, you can check your liberal at the door with me,,and we can discuss PE things...

You see, that's the awesome thing about being a conservative, I gave you choices, and now you're forced to make a choice, all on your own....we will await your decision....

You're anonymous on the internet. But I will believe you have more BS than Nosmo.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Oh yeah, lmao..good idea. Have you seen the air and water and ground in china? You want that here? Just so the greedy corporations can profit off of ruining our water our land and our air?

did you know that the epa can tell you what to do on your land?
did you know if you don't bow to their illegal demands they can fine you?
did you know that if you take them to court, win, they can ignore the court order and keep fining you?

epa ignores court order - Google Search

Yes, I know that and I say, good for the epa. You care more about corporate profits than the air you breath? Do you own a corporation? Do you have a chip in this hand? If not, why are you jumping on the side of big biz. Do you think prices will decrease? No, but corporate profit will increase even more.

you're dumber than a month old turnip.

what part of WE HAVE THE CONSTITUTION RIGHT TO OUR PROPERTY is to much for you to understand?

and the same idiotic bullshit that pollution will rise


get some new material, fucking moron

 

[owebo]

You have no clue....

Hey asshole, read:

the other poster said:

"To solve environmental problem, we need to eliminate the government."

Yes, he said 'eliminate government'. If you eliminate government, there are no laws against dumping toxins, therefore dumping toxins anywhere becomes legal.

Got it?

What company will do that? Do you have a real career? Or do you flip burgers?

Every company will do that that thinks they can gain an advantage. Based on the other poster's scheme I could in fact dump my trash in his front yard without legal liability.

Which companies?

Companies like this:

EPA fines coal producer $27.5 million for Appalachian pollution

In bripat's vision of the world, none of the above pollution would be illegal.

Accidents happen....pipes do fail...Do you think the companies indicated purposely broke the pipes?

 

[owebo]

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

I recall when the EPA decided that asbestos had to be removed from the ductwork in public schools. It turned out the it was safer to leave the asbestos ductwork in place than kick up a lot of asbestos laden dust by removing it, and the cost of removing it was astronomical. That's how the EPA benefits the American tax payer.

You're ill informed. You are also arguing from anecdote. You have no proof and sound sad and silly.

"Anecdote" must be a leftwing euphemism meaning "historical fact."

I know that you don't know me. But, fair warning, I am an expert on this topic. I am an Environmental Engineer with twenty four years of experience. I know what I'm talking about and I know that you know nothing. Your best course of action at this point is to concede and write nothing else before your utter lack of knowledge betrays you as the ass you show yourself to be.

Well child, I do know you are an egotistical liberal, so that makes understanding you very easy....and that you are not that smart, as evidenced by your posts.

A 24 year engineer is not all that impressive to me and if you want to compare size, I have over 30 years with 2 degrees, a BS in environmental science, and a BS in mechanical engineering.....so.....

So, you can stop huffing and puffing as we have observed, it makes you look the fool...

Now let me make an assumption, are you a government employee? From your posts you seem to know your job, but it seems you confuse your jobs value to you and the value of your work to society. It seems your in a position that makes you a parasite on industry and other peoples success and progress.....

Well, anyway....huff and puff some more and I will hand you your ass far worse than I did above.....

Or, you can check your liberal at the door with me,,and we can discuss PE things...

You see, that's the awesome thing about being a conservative, I gave you choices, and now you're forced to make a choice, all on your own....we will await your decision....

You're anonymous on the internet. But I will believe you have more BS than Nosmo.

From a LWNJ like you, I will translate that into a compliment...

 

[TNHarley]

Question: if the EPA is so great for our country, why do our Washington cronies make FTAs that ignore other countries regulations?
Isn't very consistent right?
Sounds like they want slave labor or socialism, no?

 

[TNHarley]

Question: if the EPA is so great for our country, why do our Washington cronies make FTAs that ignore other countries regulations?
Isn't very consistent right?
Sounds like they want slave labor or socialism, no?

 

[Grizz]

I have no problem keeping the EPA, but they need to be stripped of enacting any regulations without an affirmative vote of Congress first. Nothing in the Constitution gives unelected bureaucrats authority to make law.

No. Lmao. It is our elected officials that give the corporations whatever they want and this is a dead giveaway to anyone seeking the truth. The EPA is by itself to distance themselves from the corruption that is rampid in our political system.

You seem to be a "Constitutional Scholar"....not. The EPA has ZERO authority to implement laws, that is the sole responsibility of Congress. Sorry.

 

[bripat9643]

You have no clue....

Hey asshole, read:

the other poster said:

"To solve environmental problem, we need to eliminate the government."

Yes, he said 'eliminate government'. If you eliminate government, there are no laws against dumping toxins, therefore dumping toxins anywhere becomes legal.

Got it?

What company will do that? Do you have a real career? Or do you flip burgers?

Every company will do that that thinks they can gain an advantage. Based on the other poster's scheme I could in fact dump my trash in his front yard without legal liability.

Which companies?

Companies like this:

EPA fines coal producer $27.5 million for Appalachian pollution

In bripat's vision of the world, none of the above pollution would be illegal.

It would get the company sued, so your theory that there wouldn't be any consequences for polluting the water and land of other property owners is clearly without merit.

 

[my2¢]

I may have to change my mind on voting for Trump depending how hard he pushes for the elimination of the EPA. I see it as irresponsible and mostly a matter that he desires only taxpayer money being used to clean up corporations' environmental mess.

 

[owebo]

I may have to change my mind on voting for Trump depending how hard he pushes for the elimination of the EPA. I see it as irresponsible and mostly a matter that he desires only taxpayer money being used to clean up corporations' environmental mess.

We don't want you,,,,so go the fuck away and vote hitlery.....