MoreSome politicians have suggested overhauling or possibly eliminating the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In last week’s CI CyberNews CyberPoll, we asked readers if they would agree with a revamp of the EPA. What are your thoughts on this topic?
Some politicians have suggested overhauling or possibly eliminating the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In last week’s CI CyberNews CyberPoll, we asked readers if they would agree with a revamp of the EPA. Most of the respondents (65.2%) do think drastic changes are needed, while others (26.1%) believe the EPA should remain as-is. The remainder (8.7%) are unsure.
Comments included:
“Originally, the EPA was an organization of scientist and engineers. The focus was technical. Because of poorly written laws, the primary focus is now regulatory in nature. The science and engineering is almost non-existent. We are beholden to judges, administrators and lawyers who have little or no scientific background or training. These ineffective laws force non-scientific trained judges to legislate new law in order to fill the gaps. The resulting economic and environmental impact is staggering. With the economy hurting, it is time to fix this intolerable situation for the benefit of the environment and industry.” -- Craig King
“What is wrong with air we can breathe, water we can drink and farm land that can still produce food we can eat?”
“Getting rid of it? That sounds like a terribly irresponsible idea. Streamlining, sure.”
“Absolutely, the EPA needs a MAJOR overhaul. Like many U.S. government agencies (FDA, OSHA, etc), the EPA exhibits a serious degree of incompetence and sometimes over-reaction that causes undue burden and unnecessary regulatory action that adversely impacts states and individuals. EPA needs to have its authority drastically limited!”
“This country was headed for disaster pre-EPA. Anyone who believes that industry will regulate itself either has a short memory or is selling something. If anything, the EPA should be strengthened. Our air is cleaner, our water safer, and food and drug safety is there because of strong government agencies. This should not be subject to the desire of conservatives to push us back to nineteenth-century standards.”
“It is not acceptable to pollute the environment; it never has been.”
Are you interested in taking the industry’s pulse on a particular topic? Send your suggestions for CyberPoll questions to Kelsey Seidler at seidlerk@bnpmedia.com.
Many thanks to all of the CI CyberNews readers who have participated in our CyberPolls. Not a CI CyberNews subscriber? Follow this link to sign up for your free subscription!
Some politicians have suggested overhauling or possibly eliminating the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In last week’s CI CyberNews CyberPoll, we asked readers if they would agree with a revamp of the EPA. Most of the respondents (65.2%) do think drastic changes are needed, while others (26.1%) believe the EPA should remain as-is. The remainder (8.7%) are unsure.
Comments included:
“Originally, the EPA was an organization of scientist and engineers. The focus was technical. Because of poorly written laws, the primary focus is now regulatory in nature. The science and engineering is almost non-existent. We are beholden to judges, administrators and lawyers who have little or no scientific background or training. These ineffective laws force non-scientific trained judges to legislate new law in order to fill the gaps. The resulting economic and environmental impact is staggering. With the economy hurting, it is time to fix this intolerable situation for the benefit of the environment and industry.” -- Craig King
“What is wrong with air we can breathe, water we can drink and farm land that can still produce food we can eat?”
“Getting rid of it? That sounds like a terribly irresponsible idea. Streamlining, sure.”
“Absolutely, the EPA needs a MAJOR overhaul. Like many U.S. government agencies (FDA, OSHA, etc), the EPA exhibits a serious degree of incompetence and sometimes over-reaction that causes undue burden and unnecessary regulatory action that adversely impacts states and individuals. EPA needs to have its authority drastically limited!”
“This country was headed for disaster pre-EPA. Anyone who believes that industry will regulate itself either has a short memory or is selling something. If anything, the EPA should be strengthened. Our air is cleaner, our water safer, and food and drug safety is there because of strong government agencies. This should not be subject to the desire of conservatives to push us back to nineteenth-century standards.”
“It is not acceptable to pollute the environment; it never has been.”
Are you interested in taking the industry’s pulse on a particular topic? Send your suggestions for CyberPoll questions to Kelsey Seidler at seidlerk@bnpmedia.com.
Many thanks to all of the CI CyberNews readers who have participated in our CyberPolls. Not a CI CyberNews subscriber? Follow this link to sign up for your free subscription!
With access to over one million professionals and more than 60 industry-specific publications,
