OK, so for us Cowboy types who need to understand things fully before we jump on someone for doing things shady, let's take a quick look at the job of the EPA.
Don't worry, it's not that long a description.
According to the EPA's own website, the mission of EPA (Environmental Protection Administration) is "to protect human health and the environment."
That's there mission, that's it. They say their "purpose is to ensure that:
•all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn and work;
•national efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information;
•federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively;
•environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;
•all parts of society - communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments - have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;
•environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse, sustainable and economically productive; and
•the United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment."
To accomplish this mission, they say the EPA is tasked to:
They say they accomplish their mission through Grants, Environmental Studies, partnership up with other groups, Educate people about who is screwing up the environment, and of course regulate everyone and everything in the United States that uses water, air, walks on the land.
Actually, they regulate our: Air, Water, Land, Pesticides, Toxic Substances, Cleanup, Emergencies, and what is termed Cross-Cutting Issues that my have more than one government agency involved.
From manufacturing to agriculture to building America's infrastructure, the EPA has their hand in it.
Yes, they regulate many - if not all - sectors of the American Economy. From what I've learned over the years, the EPA regulates almost everything.
In Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting, they regulate:
- Agriculture Crop Production (NAICS 111)
- Animal Production (NAICS 112), and
- Forestry and Logging (NAICS 113).
- Construction (NAICS 23),
- Educational Services (NAICS 61),
- Healthcare and Social Assistance (NAICS 62),
- Manufacturing (NAICS 31-33),
- Aerospace (NAICS 332 and 336),
- Chemical Manufacturing (NAICS 325),
- Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing (NAICS 334),
- Food Processing (NAICS 311),
- Furniture Manufacturing (NAICS 337),
- Primary Metal Manufacturing (NAICS 331) and
- Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing (NAICS 332),
- Mineral Processing (Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing) (NAICS 327),
- Petroleum (NAICS 324),
- Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing (NAICS 3254),
- Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing (NAICS 326),
- Printing and Related Support Activities (NAICS 323),
- Shipbuilding (Transportation Equipment Manufacturing) (NAICS 336),
- Textile Manufacturing (NAICS 313),
- Wood Product Manufacturing (NAICS 321), and
- Paper Manufacturing (Paper, Pulp, and Lumber) (NAICS 322),
- Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction Sectors (NAICS 21),
- Mining (except Oil and Gas) (NAICS 212),
- Oil and Gas Extraction (NAICS 211),
- Public Administration (NAICS 92),
- American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Governments (NAICS 921150),
- Federal Facilities (Executive Offices) (NAICS 921110),
- International Affairs (NAICS 928120),
- Local Governments (Executive Offices) (NAICS 921110),
- Other Services (except Public Administration) (NAICS 81),
- Automotive Repair and Maintenance (NAICS 8111),
- Dry Cleaning (NAICS 8123), and
- Retail Trade (NAICS 44).
- Transportation (NAICS 48-49),
- Utilities (NAICS 22), and
- Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution (NAICS 2211).
Fact is, no matter how they spin it - they understand their power. And yes, for good reason, they have more power to stifle economic progress than any other department in the United States Government.
Some are asking if it is too much power concentrated in one department. Laws written by Congress provide the authority for EPA to write regulations. And yes, some are asking if it's not time to reign in the EPA and it's powerful hold on American lives and businesses.
Ask yourself this, why are their regulations based on mainly subjective data instead of objective scientific data? Why are they so willing to impose recommended practices yet quickly withdraw those recommendations after Congress started questioning their own practice?
This was the case earlier this year when they tried to stop young people from working on their own family farms? A huge outcry arose and the EPA withdrew it's new regulation regarding that issue?
Where did their decision to evoke their authority come from? And if it was so easily recalled, why was it that important an issue that they would push it?
Was it just a situation of some bureaucrat making the call just to justify his or her position? How much more so-called "critical regulation" is just made up by some joker in government just to justify his position and maybe get a lift up the government ladder?
And yes, it is a fact that the EPA goes above and beyond standards and recommended practices to create artificially high extremely unrealistic guidelines.
Besides studies, I know that for fact because I was told that that's the case after sitting in on a lecture given by an EPA representative back when I was studying Inspection Technology for my degree before going into the Inspection field in the Energy Industry.
And ask yourself, where does the EPA get their research data when creating the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, or the Toxic Substances Control Act?
Fact is, more of their research data from radical Environmentalist Groups who would rather see our economy suffer and subsequently people be deprived of employment - then from non-biased groups that don't have an political agenda.
Their own website says, "Regulations explain the technical, operational, and legal details necessary to implement laws." But where do they get the data to create the regulations?
It sure isn't from business friendly groups. Most business friendly groups see capitalism as a friend and provider to people and society as a whole, in contrast radical environmentalist groups see capitalism as the enemy of the earth.
The EPA says they are, "Helping government, business and the public meet federal environmental requirements."
They say they are doing this through a system of "Self-disclosure/ compliance audit; Enforcement holding people and companies legally accountable for violations of laws and regulations; Report a possible violation;" through policy awareness and guidance; and a system of indoctrinating people as to their way of thinking.
As they state, "Protecting the environment is everyone's responsibility, and starts with understanding the issues. The basics include reducing how much energy and materials you use, reusing what you can and recycling the rest. There's a lot more about that to learn!"
And yes, they are willing to "teach" people how they should think about their responsibility. Yes, it's called propaganda, and the EPA is all for it. Don't believe me, just look in our elementary schools where the youngest and easiest to indoctrinate are being forced fed extreme environmental views such as Global Warming - which has not been proven..
Their site says, "We don't protect the environment on our own, we work with businesses, non-profit organizations, and state and local governments through dozens of partnerships. A few examples include conserving water and energy, minimizing greenhouse gases, re-using solid waste, and getting a handle on pesticide risks. In return, we share information and publicly recognize our partners."
But if that's the case, then why the secret e-mail accounts and phony names?
That's the question that House Republicans are asking while investigating EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and other high-ranking agency officials.
Have they been conducting official business with email aliases or secret accounts to avoid scrutiny from agency watchdogs and the public? And why? Why is a regulator hiding their actions?
Is there internal corruption and graft involved at the EPA? Are there people being manipulated for criminal reasons?
These are legitimate questions when you look at the areas that they alone regulate. They alone can do whatever they want and circumvent policies and procedures to accomplish all sorts of nefarious dealings.
And yes, who those this gigantic regulatory agency answer to? No one really. Unless of course they are could doing something that appears shady like this thing with Secret e-mails and using aliases.
Why do that if you are above board? Why do that if you don't have something to hide?
The House Science, Space and Technology Committee is leading the investigation and has asked Jackson to turn over information connected to the email account “Richard Windsor” – one of the alleged alias accounts.
The Daily Caller reported first that Jackson was using an email alias, based on research by Competitive Enterprise Institute fellow Christopher Horner.
He says the agency’s use of secret email accounts dates back to the Clinton administration and then-Administrator Carol Browner.
“You remember Ms. Browner, the lady who suddenly ordered her computer hard drive reformatted and backup tapes erased, hours after a federal court issued a ‘preserve’ order … that her lawyers at the Clinton Justice Department insisted they hadn’t yet told her about?” Horner said in the Daily Caller story.
Horner and the institute filed a lawsuit in September claiming EPA employees are using the private Gmail-type accounts to send official emails.
The House committee says federal law requires agencies to preserve all internal records associated with official activities and prohibits the use of private email accounts for government business, unless there are procedures in place to track and store such messages.
An EPA spokesman said Monday the agency has for roughly a decade assigned internal and public email addresses to administrators and that they use the internal one to communicate with staff because of the massive amount of traffic on the public accounts.
The spokesman also said both accounts are reviewed and made available when a Freedom of Information Act request is made.
The committee also said the email allegations follow "similarly secretive and highly questionable methods of communication by senior officials at science agencies within the White House, Commerce Department and Energy Department."
Secret e-mails and phony names? I can't help but wonder if there are bank accounts for bribes? Maybe there are accounts where heads of the EPA are stealing money?
Of course, maybe the crooks in the EPA that found it necessary to cover their tracks by using secret e-mail and phony names wanted to disguise a money trail of some sort?
Since it is well known that Obama administration heads violated Federal Law by campaigning for the President as the election approached, maybe someone should ask if the email account "Richard Windsor" – one of the alleged alias accounts - made a huge campaign contribution with agency funds?
Anything is possible, especially when the agency is ripe for corruption. And if not some sort of criminal act, then why do they find the need to hide their actions through the use of fake names and secret e-mail accounts?
This is not what honest people do.
Story by Tom Correa