On February 3rd, 2016, a bill was introduced to terminate the Environmental Protection Agency. There’s little to no information on the actual bill as of yet. As of February 5th, 2016, we do not have a summary of the bill, and the bill has not yet been sent to the House or Senate. In the words of the government: “Delays can occur when there are a large number of bills to prepare or when a very large bill has to be printed.”
— Alternative NOAA (@altNOAA) February 5, 2017
All three original co-sponsers of this bill to terminate the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are of the Republican Party. They are Thomas Massie (KY), Steven M. Palazzo (MS), and Barry Loudermark (GA).
Of course, there are many steps that need to take place before this bill becomes law. It needs to pass the House, then pass Senate, then it goes to the President. If the President approves it, it becomes law. If he vetoes it, it can still become law with a couple of extra steps.
WAIT … WHAT DOES THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY DO?
The EPA, which was founded in 1970, is a federal agency that was intended to protect human life and the environment by means of government enforcing laws and regulations that would be passed by Congress. Without it, humans could be put in a lot more danger than we already are in via environmental causes.
For example, the EPA regulates air quality. With the EPA handling this, researching this, and coming up with various solutions to air quality problems, it reduces the risk of pollution-related diseases. Without people working to keep our air quality to EPA standards, humans and the environment are at constant risk, and our risk will worsen even more. The EPA, of course, regulates much more, including drinking water, oil pollution, regulating exposed asbestos, etc. You can see more information here.
Getting rid of the Environmental Protection Agency does one thing for the government — brings them in money short term. However, it would cause damage that couldn’t be reversed (and we already have enough of that to deal with), and have incredibly negative impacts to our health in general. Think of China and their lack of air quality in many parts of the country.
Dissolving the @EPA would only mean short-term profits (for their businesses), & surely irreversible environmental damage for the future.
— Emily Graslie (@Ehmee) February 5, 2017
The government, at this point, is willingly ignoring science, health, and technology measures for means of profit. This comes as no surprise to me. If this doesn’t prove that the government doesn’t care about taking care of its people, I don’t know what does. Clearly what is important to them as a whole is making money, and treating the government as a business.
FemSTEM will keep you updated on the bill, and how its faired through the law-making process.