Saturday, January 28, 2017

Trump Knows Media Will Hate Him Anyway, ‘So Why Not Go Big?’

Breitbart ^ | 01/27/2016 | John Hayward 

On Friday’s Breitbart News Daily, Ned Ryun, the founder and CEO of American Majority, told SiriusXM host Raheem Kassam that President Donald Trump’s first week in office has gone as he expected.

“I think the thing that he has decided – and he decided a long time ago, but now you’re seeing real proof of it – whether he goes small or big, the media’s going to hate him. The Left’s going to hate him. So why not just go big?” Ryun said. “Let’s just go out and do what I said I was going to do.”

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Secret Service agent placed on paid leave over Trump remarks

NY Post ^ | January 28, 2017 | Fox 

A Denver-based Secret Service agent who reportedly suggested that she would rather go to jail than take a bullet for President Trump has been placed on administrative leave.

The Washington Examiner reported Friday that Kerry O’Grady, the special agent in charge of the Secret Service’s Denver district, was placed on paid leave during an investigation. Special Agent Kerry O’Grady
O’Grady reportedly posted on Facebook in October, “As a public servant for nearly 23 years, I struggle not to violate the Hatch Act,” O’Grady wrote. “So I keep quiet and skirt the median. To do otherwise can be a criminal offense for those in my position. Despite the fact that I am expected to take a bullet for both sides. But this world has changed and I have changed. And I would take jail time over a bullet or an endorsement for what I believe to be disaster to this country and the strong and amazing women and minorities who reside here. Hatch Act be damned. I am with Her.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


"Alarmed by Trump's executive actions? Here's what you need to know"

Conservative Review ^ | 1/26/2017 | Robert Eno 

"Can a limited government conservative be happy with the results of Trump’s executive actions after questioning and criticizing President Obama’s use of the pen for eight years? That is the central question that seems to be being asked on social media over the whirlwind first three full days of the Trump presidency. The answer is like all things complicated. In order to arrive at an answer, however, some facts are needed.
Some of the questions conservatives should be asking include: Are all executive actions similar? What is the difference between a presidential memorandum and an “executive order?” Where does Trump’s use of executive orders stand historically? What sorts of executive orders should be troubling?
First, not all executive actions are similar. There are three types of presidential actions: executive orders, presidential memoranda, and proclamations. Each of these accomplishes a different thing.
According to a Congressional Research Service report, “executive orders and proclamations are directives of actions by the President. When they are founded on the authority of the President derived from Constitution or statute, they may have the force and effect of law.” It is important to note that executive orders should not create law. Instead, orders are often used to direct how government agencies are to run under a particular president, and must be published in the Federal Register.
The other major avenue for presidential action is the presidential memorandum. In the general sense, these memoranda direct government agencies on their operations to ensure that certain objectives of the president are carried out. Think of it as the memo your boss sends you outlining your quarterly objectives. These memoranda do not get published in the Federal Register, although most administrations have published them on WhiteHouse.gov since the advent of the internet."
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativereview.com ...

Sheriff Clarke: ‘I’m Tired of One-Percenters like Mark Zuckerberg’ Lecturing Us About Who We Are!

Breitbart ^ | 1-28-2017 | Jeff Poor 

Saturday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends Weekend,” Milwaukee County, WI Sheriff David Clarke ripped the critics of those that oppose President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting refugees from certain countries from coming to the United States and in particular Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who he pointed out has his own wall at his home in Hawaii.

“First of all, I’m tired of one-percenters like Mark Zuckerberg and others lecturing us about who we are,” Clarke said. “I know who I am and most Americans know who they are. We are a sovereign nation. If you’re going to be a sovereign nation, you have to have borders and you have to protect those borders. Mark Zuckerberg has no idea of who’s coming into this country and what it takes to vet those individuals. I as a law enforcement officer in my 39th year. We do a lot of vetting of people.”

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Behold: A Celebrity Patriots Can Admire

American Thinker ^ | January 28, 2017 | Elise Cooper 

Professors, political commentators, celebrities, and even some in the mainstream media have engaged in rhetoric to denounce Donald Trump.

It appeared that Lady Gaga sported an outfit resembling a Nazi uniform at Hillary Clinton's final rally, and then there was Madonna at the women's march in Washington, D.C., who told the crowd that she had "thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House." In addition, Hollywood stars and those in the press have gone over the line by describing Trump and his administration as "Hitlerian."

This comparison is ridiculous, considering that Trump's son-in-law and daughter are Orthodox Jews, and giving an invocation at the inauguration was Rabbi Marvin Hier, the dean of The Simon Wiesenthal Center, which confronts anti-Semitism. People should not forget that during Hitler's regime, there were political opponents thrown into prison, with many executed; the mass slaughter of Jews and gays along with other ethnicities; Russian prisoners of war killed; forced labor camps; the Nuremberg laws of 1935; children experimented on; and the Final Solution of the Jews. By comparing Trump to Hitler people are trivializing the Holocaust's victims.

Celebrities such as Madonna, Lady Gaga, and Meryl Streep are described as brave, a true inspiration, and heroes. But what have they really done besides using hyperbolic language? Have they fought for human rights around the globe? In many Middle Eastern countries such as Iran and Iraq, women are used as "slave girls," beaten, abused, and executed. In Nigeria, the Boko Haram terrorist network kidnapped two hundred schoolgirls only because they were Christians. In Afghanistan, acid was thrown in the faces of three teenage girls just because they wanted to attend school, while in Syria ISIS is executing homosexuals. Yet the celebrities are quiet. They do not know what the word courageous means.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Final Tally: Obama's Subpar Economy Cost Americans $2.4 Trillion

IBD ^ | Junuary 27, 2017 

Economics: The GDP report for the fourth quarter last year was a fitting end to President Obama's time in office. At a tepid 1.9% growth, it means that the economy once again underperformed everyone's expectations.


As late as June 2016, the Obama administration was forecasting that real GDP would climb 2.2% for the year. Actual growth for 2016 was 1.6%, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
[snip]
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...

Why Obama Did Not Pardon Bergdahl

American Thinker ^ | January 28, 2017 | Jonathan F. Keiler 

Before he left office Barack Obama commuted more federal sentences than any other president in history, most famously that of former Army Private Bradley Manning, who divulged hundreds of thousands of classified documents and seriously damaged national security.

 Drug offenders were also high on Obama’s list. Notably absent was Army Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, whom Obama ransomed for several notorious Taliban terrorists, and Obama’s National Security Advisor proclaimed an American hero.

Why did Manning get the nod and not Bergdahl?

Obama was far more personally invested in Bergdahl’s case, feting his parents in the Rose Garden upon the soldier’s release from Taliban captivity, and practically groping his mom, which even made liberal columnist Richard Cohen a bit queasy. But in deciphering Obama’s inaction on Bergdahl one first has to adopt the ex-president’s mindset, which might be summarized as “what’s in it for me?”

Obama had little to gain personally from intervening in Bergdahl’s case in his final days in office, despite the high cost we paid to recover the alleged deserter from Taliban captivity, and his own aide’s glowing words about Bergdahl, which surely reflected Obama’s own view at the time.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...

Illegal Aliens Really Do Vote – a Lot

By William Campenni


A warm, sunny Saturday a decade ago, there was a Hispanic festival in our small town, a bedroom community for illegal aliens seeking day labor jobs in the nearby wealthy suburbs. It was a sanctuary city at the time. No problem with the festival itself.  The music was lively and the food tasty.  And don't the Irish have St. Patrick's Day, and the Italians Columbus Day?
While wandering around the festivities, I noticed a table with three nice ladies in front of a "Register To Vote" sign.  Curious about its presence at a festival where the bulk of the crowd was either illegal alien day laborers or legal non-citizens, I went over to inquire.  Before I spoke, one of those nice ladies asked me if I was registered to vote.  Wanting to see where this would go, I said no, and asked how to sign up. A voter registration form was thrust in my hands.  The very first item on these forms, in Virginia and the rest of America, was "I am a citizen of the United States of America," with YES and NO blocks to check.
"Don't I need to show you some proof of citizenship?" I asked. She replied "no."  I asked her how she could verify that I wasn’t lying. Sensing she might be on a slippery slope, she called over a supervisor from the Registrar's Office and told the woman of my concern.  The official told me they never checked citizenship status because I would be penalized if I lied. Really? So I asked her how she would verify my truthfulness, or those of the dozens of new voters being registered that day.  Defensively, she replied that they checked all registrations for accuracy at the Registrar's Office when they were turned in.
I called the Registrar Monday, and asked if they do indeed verify citizenship status.  I was told that they didn't unless someone made a specific complaint against an individual applicant.
Forward to our next local election, where the illegal alien presence and an unlawful day labor site were THE issues, I noticed that the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) in their purple tee shirts, and their local spinoffs were canvassing the town.  I followed them for awhile as they went to homes and neighborhoods where the illegal aliens concentrated, and watched them exit each home or apartment with a new handful of voter registrations.   
Ten years later, nobody at the Registrar's Office is checking citizenship.
The brutal truth is that illegal aliens vote, and in large numbers.  Voter fraud is not exclusive to illegal aliens.  There are also legal aliens (green card, H1B visas, tourist visa holders, etc.) who vote illegally.  And it's not just Latin Americans.  The non-citizen demographic includes South Asian tech workers, Irish overstays, West and Horn of Africa immigrants, and Asian students. Then there are dual-state voters (college kids, snowbirds, transients), reincarnated voters, and un-purged voters long moved from their precincts.
While few cases are prosecuted, it’s not because few crimes are committed. Political pressure from Democrats and the cowardly establishment, open-borders Republicans, precludes rigorous enforcement. The United States Attorney in Virginia refused to prosecute such cases in several Northern Virginia counties. The Democratic Party Commissioner of the Virginia Department of Elections refused to release any information on illegal alien registrations.  Rep. Paul Ryan and Sen. Lindsey Graham deny the existence of voter fraud, but they offer no proof for their position. Then they ridicule President Trump when he asks to investigate the problem. 
In fact, numerous studies document the fraud that these politicians and their media votaries consciously ignore or derisively rebut.  A well researched report on illegal alien voting in my home state of Virginia revealed more than a thousand illegal alien registrants in just eight counties. It did not include the two most populous, of which one, Fairfax County, is a de facto sanctuary county, and the very county described in the opening paragraphs of this article.  Extrapolate those eight Virginia county totals to the whole state, and then to the entire United States, including states like California where no illegal alien controls exist, and you can see that President Trump's claims are not so frivolous. 
The effects of turning a blind eye to this felonious voter fraud? Virginia was once a solid red state.  Once the illegal alien invasion hit the state in full flood after 2004, (thanks in part to Republican amnesty advocate George Bush's indifference to the tsunami) it  became a blue state.  The margin of Hillary Clinton's victory over Donald Trump in Virginia was almost entirely her margin in Fairfax County, where illegals have sanctuary and are protected by a solidly Democrat government.  In five recent statewide elections, the Republican margin of defeat - Cuccinelli for Governor (vs. McAuliffe), Gillespie for Senate (vs. Warner), Allen for Senate (vs. Webb), and two Attorneys General - was almost certainly the result of illegal voting.  Al Franken sits in the Senate almost certainly because of Minnesota vote fraud.  Paul Ryan in his gerrymandered Wisconsin protectorate may not know that, but we citizens in Virginia and elsewhere do know it.
Virginia has recently implemented some controls on voter fraud, such as a photo ID requirement.  But that law has been weakened by liberal court challenges and a Democrat governor.  What’s more, the ID law controls fraud only on election day.  The real fraud is in the registration process.  Once on the voter rolls, illegals are essentially home free, because even a photo ID is easy to come by.   
Analysts John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky, and TV reporter Eric Shawn, have done yeoman’s work in several published studies on voter fraud.  A new study confirms similar voting fraud in Philadelphia, the electoral whale in Pennsylvania’s elections.  As far back as 2012, a CBS 4/Miami Herald study, not exactly a right wing bastion, revealed that Florida’s voter rolls included as many as 180,000 non-citizen legal resident voters, while illegal alien voters weren’t even noted because they could not be explicitly identified. The left-leaning Pew Research Center in 2012 contended that state voter rolls contain millions of inaccuracies ripe for exploitation.
There are numerous surveys in other states with similar results, should Ryan, Graham, Fox News, CNN and those of their ilk bother to study them instead of rail against Trump.
Speaking of which, the Democratic (and Republican) politicians and pundits who now ridicule Trump as lacking evidence, are ignoring evidence which already exists. Trump has called their bluff, and there will now be the investigation they have sought. People in the real world already know the results.  You can be sure that Democratic Secretaries of State and Democrat-controlled election boards are scurrying to seclude their files from prying eyes, and the federal and state bureaucracies who must supply the corroborating support data (jury duty exclusions, green card identities, tax records, visa overstays, border entry records, illegal alien arrests, drivers licenses, etc.) are finding ways to hide or retain the information.
For many inside the chattering class Beltway bubble, illegal alien vote fraud is a debating exercise with the endgame political advantage.  But for each and every citizen, it is a theft of that person's sacred vote. As with illegal alien crime, the compassion always goes to the perpetrator, not the victim.  But my vote and your vote was secured and defended by thousands of servicemen over the years, many of whom gave their lives.  It is sad and disgraceful to know that the value of a hard-won vote is being destroyed by people who shouldn't even be in this country. Bring on that investigation!
William Campenni is a retired engineer, business owner, and Air Force fighter pilot.
 
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/illegal_aliens_really_do_vote_a_lot.html#ixzz4X4ovJOAz 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

A GOP Regulatory Game Changer

Wall Street Journal ^ | 01/26/2017 | Kimberly Strassell 

Todd Gaziano on Wednesday stepped into a meeting of free-market attorneys, think tankers and Republican congressional staff to unveil a big idea. By the time he stepped out, he had reset Washington’s regulatory battle lines.

Crux of article (which can't be read if you don't subscribe) is this:

A little known rule in the CRA (Congressional Review Act) allows Congress to override almost all of Obama's regulatory actions. Many Republicans thought the time had passed on these acts of Obama (such as on transgender school bathrooms and field trips) because the act says Congress only has 60 days to overturn.

But the hidden gem is they have 60 days from the time the rule is SUBMITTED to Congress.

Obama was such an ass that he never bothered sending the most controversial and onerous rules to Congress for review.

Trump and Republicans are now contemplating setting aside one day a month where these rules would be printed, sent to Congress and overturned that day.
They needn't be discussed, can't be fillabustered, and need only simple majority to overturn.
Congressional leaders figure they could whip through one an hour. They just need the stones to do it because there will be a huge outcry from Dems 

Female Marines to sleep next to male Marines in field (birth control ordered)

Fox 19 ^ | 1-26-2017 

Female infantry Marines will be sleeping in makeshift shelters next to their male counterparts when out in the field and no special accommodation will be offered to them, a Marine Corps official said Thursday.

Marines in the field stay in everything from a large, single room shelter filled with dozens of cots to sleeping under tarps or nothing at all, said Maj. Charles Anklam III, executive officer for 1st Battalion, 8th Marines at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina - the first gender-integrated Marine infantry battalion.
Female Marines have private rooms and bathrooms in their living quarters, and female bathrooms have been added to buildings where Marines work. But female Marines will be expected to share any living spaces with male squad members in the field to keep unit cohesion and replicate battlefield conditions, he said.
"We're not changing our tactical posture or changing how we operate to accommodate the inclusion of female Marines," Anklam said.
The battalion accepted its first three females in early January, marking the first time the Marine Corps has put three enlisted women in a ground combat unit once open only to men. They will serve as a rifleman, machine gunner and mortar Marine.
Anklam said female Marines deployed to conflict zones have shared tents with their male counterparts at times. But this marks the first time female Marines will be doing so during their regular training with their combat unit.
Opponents of the Obama administration's policy change voiced concern about the two genders sharing tents.
"You're going to have sex, you're going to have love, you're going to have relationships, and it's going to overly complicate the command structure," Marine veteran, Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, told the Marine Corps Times.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox19.com ...

Liberals Fleeing to Canada Fail to Meet Immigration Standards!

DML/DennisMichaelLynch ^ | 1/27/17 | Marie Aubry 

Disenchanted liberals are rushing the border to Canada to flee from President Trump only to discover they do not meet immigration requirements.

The Daily Caller reports that one of the policies that many liberals are protesting is President Trump’s proposal to crack down on immigration and introduce “extreme vetting” measures before allowing immigrants to enter the U.S. from Syria and several other countries.

Ironically, those very liberals who are intent on jumping ship to greener pastures are being met with similar strict sanctions and vetting policies in countries like Australia and Canada.

According to Canada’s immigration page, its stringent immigration policies include being able to “immigrate as a skilled worker,” “immigrate by starting a business and creating jobs” or “immigrate by investing in the Canadian economy.”

(Excerpt) Read more at dennismichaellynch.com ...

Dr. Keith Ablow: What's REALLY going on in Trump's mind? (Hint: it's not what you think)

Fox News ^ | January 27,2017 | By Dr. Keith Ablow 

The media is all abuzz, again, about the fact that President Trump spent some time during his televised interview with ABC anchor David Muir pointing out the large size of the crowd in photos of his inauguration. Journalists, who still don’t seem able to understand that Trump is almost always several steps ahead of them, once again are heralding the president’s seeming preoccupation with the issue.

Is the president actually so thin-skinned that he needs the world to acknowledge that a huge number of people turned out to honor him as he was sworn in? Um, no.
So what’s really going on in his mind? Here’s my opinion: Everything Donald Trump does is strategically calculated to achieve a goal. His communication is designed not to simply convey his gut feelings, but to make people focus on one thing — call it a decoy — so he can do six other things while they’re distracted.
Trump has masterfully used the media’s pathetic naiveté and desire to battle him to make them focus on a throwaway battle — his seeming obsession with crowd size (which I can almost guarantee he could not care less about) — while he determinedly does what he does care about: signing orders that resurrect pipeline projects, retooling our broken immigration laws, laying the groundwork for a better health care system and preparing to build the wall.
journalists who still don’t get it, here it is, again, in direct terms: When Trump says something like “If I were you I would take your camera and look at the size of the crowd,” he is actually saying, “Let’s debate crowd size, again, because otherwise you might ask me questions about my real and historically powerful plans and ideas, which I don’t trust you to report on fairly, anyhow.”
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

NAACP Vows to Oppose Trump’s Voter Fraud Investigation

Breitbart ^ | 27 Jan 2017 | Warner Todd Huston 

The head of the NCAAP has come out in stark opposition to President Donald J. Trump’s coming investigation into voter fraud, claiming it is “racist.”

In an interview on CNN, Cornell William Brooks, president and CEO of the NAACP, insisted that his organization would “resist” the president’s investigation into fraud during the 2016 election. “The President has claimed millions of fraudulent ballots were cast.
The only place you will find millions of fraudulent ballots are right beside that fake birth certificate for Barack Obama, inside the imagination of President Trump. They don’t exist,” Brooks said on Thursday. Instead of vote fraud, Brooks insisted that there was “unrelenting voter suppression” of the minority vote in 2016. “We have seen our rights denied as Americans. Particularly seniors, African-Americans, Latinos and younger people,” Brooks exclaimed. “So, if the President insists upon conducting an investigation into voter fraud as a pretext for voter suppression, the NAACP, along with millions of Americans of every human heritage, will resist.
We will push back.” Brooks recently jumped to his Twitter account to attack the President’s investigation, calling it a figment of Trump’s imagination. In a formal statement, Brooks called vote fraud a “myth” and insisted that voter suppression is a fact.
Today, President Donald Trump called for the federal government to spend resources investigating alleged “voter fraud” in the 2016 elections. Unable to accept the fact that he lost the popular vote by some 2.8 million votes, President Trump has repeated his naked and reckless claim that 3 to 5 million illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election by “illegal immigrants.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

Liberal Media Bend Over Backwards To Avoid Describing March For Life As Pro-Life

Daily Caller ^ | 1/27/17 | Peter Hasson 

Liberal media outlets bent over backwards to avoid describing the March for Life as pro-life, relying exhaustively terms like “anti-abortion” or “abortion opponents” to describe the hundreds of thousands of pro-life marchers in Washington, D.C. on Friday.

“Anti-Abortion Groups Hold Triumphant Rally After Obama Years” was how the Associated Press titled its coverage of the march, later referring to the pro-life marchers as a “politically ascendant anti-abortion movement.”

“Vice President Mike Pence told the crowd at the March for Life that anti-abortion policies were a top priority of the new administration,” was how the AP story described Pence’s speech, which referred to “pro-life majorities” in the House and Senate. NPR described Pence’s reference to “pro-life majorities” as “emphasizing the electoral victories of anti-abortion candidates.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...

The Beginning of the End of EPA

wattsupwiththat.com ^ | January 25, 2017 | Guest essay by Jay Lehr 

At the Republican National Convention last summer, the GOP approved a platform that stated: “We propose to shift responsibility for environmental regulation from the federal bureaucracy to the states and to transform the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] into an independent bipartisan commission, similar to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, with structural safeguards against politicized science.” It also says “We will likewise forbid the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide, something never envisioned when Congress passed the Clean Air Act.”
The GOP followed the lead of President Donald Trump, who in a March debate said he would abolish EPA, and in a May speech in North Dakota condemned “the Environmental Protection Agency’s use of totalitarian tactics” that has “denied millions of Americans access to the energy wealth sitting under our feet. This is your treasure, and you – the American People – are entitled to share in the riches.”
Trump and the GOP are saying, finally, what millions of people have been thinking for a long time: EPA has become the cause of, not the solution to, the nation’s major environmental problems. It’s time to end EPA.
A Promising Beginning
In the late 1960s, the United States faced real problems regarding the quality of its air and water, waste disposal, and contamination from mining and agriculture. Pollution crossed borders – the borders between private property as well as between cities, states, and nations – and traditional remedies based on private property rights didn’t seem to be working. The public was overly complacent about the possible threat to their safety.
Many scientists, myself included, lobbied the federal government to form a cabinet-level agency to address these problems. [1] In 1971, EPA was born. During the agency’s first 10 years, Congress passed seven legislative acts to protect the environment, including the Water Pollution Control Act (later renamed the Clean Water Act), Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and the Clean Air Act.
At first, these laws worked well, protecting the environment and the health of our citizens. Problems were identified, measured, exposed, and major investments were made to reduce dangerous emissions and protect the public from exposure to them. EPA and other government agencies regularly report the subsequent dramatic reduction in all the pollutants we originally targeted. By the 1980s, nothing more needed to be done beyond monitoring our continuing success in cleaning up the environment. It was time to declare victory and go home.
EPA Is Now an Obstacle
Beginning around 1981, however, radical Leftists realized they could advance their political agenda by taking over the environmental movement and use it to advocate for ever-more draconian regulations on businesses. Environmentalists allowed this take-over to occur because it brought massive funding from liberal foundations, political power, and prestige. [2]
Politicians realized they could win votes by pandering to the environmental movement, repeating their pseudo-scientific claims, and posing as protectors of nature and the public health. The wind, solar, and ethanol industries saw they could use regulations to handicap competitors or help themselves to public subsidies.
Today, EPA is a captive of activist and special-interest groups. Its regulations have nothing to do with protecting the environment. Its rules account for nearly half of the $2 trillion annual cost of complying with all national regulations in the United States.
In 2008, The Heritage Foundation estimated the costs of EPA’s first proposal to regulate greenhouse gases in the name of fighting global warming were “close to $7 trillion and three million manufacturing jobs lost.” According to Heritage, “the sweep of regulations … could severely affect nearly every major energy-using product from cars to lawnmowers, and a million or more businesses and buildings of all types. And all of this sacrifice is in order to make, at best, a minuscule contribution to an overstated environmental threat.”
President Barack Obama has routinely used EPA to circumvent Congress to impose severe regulations on farmers, ranchers, other private landowners, fisheries, and the energy sector. Just last week, the agency rushed through approval of new fuel efficiency standards for automobiles more than a year ahead of schedule to thwart any attempts by the Trump administration to stop it. Courts and Congress have objected to and tried to limit EPA’s abuses, but without noticeable success. Once a genuine success story, EPA has become the biggest obstacle to further environmental progress.
Replacing EPA
The solution is to return this authority to the states, replacing EPA with a Committee of the Whole of the 50 state environmental protection agencies.
State EPAs already have primary responsibility for the implementation of the nation’s environmental laws and EPA regulations. With more than 30 years of experience, these state agencies are ready to take over management of the nation’s environment.
Accountable to 50 governors and state legislatures, state EPAs are more attuned to real-world needs and trade-offs. Located in 50 state capitols, they are less vulnerable to the Left’s massive beltway lobbying machine.
The Committee would be made up of representatives from each state. EPA could be phased out over five years, which could include a one-year preparation period followed by a four-year program in which 25 percent of the agency’s activities would be passed to the Committee each year.
Seventy-five percent of EPA’s budget could be eliminated and most of the remainder would pay for national research labs. A small administrative structure would allow the states to refine existing environmental laws in a manner more suitable to protecting our environment without thwarting the development of our natural resources and energy supplies.
Benefits of Replacing EPA
The federal budget for environmental protection could be reduced from $8.6 billion to $2 billion or less. Staffing could be reduced from more than 15,000 to 300. The real savings, of course, would be in reduction of the $1 trillion in annual regulatory costs EPA imposes each year.
This reform would produce a second huge benefit by ending the government’s war on affordable energy. EPA is the principal funder and advocate of global warming alarmism, the myth that man-made climate change is a crisis. That movement would end on the day EPA’s doors shut, allowing Congress to return to taxpayers and consumers a “peace dividend” amount to some of the $4 billion a day currently spent world-wide on climate change.
Dismantling EPA is one part of a comprehensive set of reforms, many of them discussed by Trump and referred to in the GOP platform, to lighten the massive weight of government regulations on the American people. The nation needs a pro-energy, pro-environment, and pro-jobs agenda that recognizes the tremendous value of the natural resources under our feet.
While the rest of the world stumbles blindly in the grip of an anti-energy and anti-freedom ideology, the U.S. can march ahead and regain its place as the world’s economic and technological leader.
The nation’s environment is in terrific shape, thanks to early efforts by EPA and more recent efforts by state governments and businesses. The nation’s economy and environment will be even better if the federal government gets out of the way.
The EPA has long outlived its usefulness. Let’s return its powers to the states, where they belong.
Jay H. Lehr, Ph.D., jlehr@heartland.org, is science director of The Heartland Institute and editor of The Alternative Energy and Shale Gas Encyclopedia. (Wiley, 2016).
[1] See, for example, references in various footnotes to my testimony in 1973 on behalf of the Clean Water Act before the Subcommittee on the Environment of the Senate Committee on Commerce, 93d Cong., 1st Sess., (1973), here: Thomas J. Douglas, Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 – History and Critique, 5 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 501 (1976),http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/ealr/vol5/iss3/5 andhttp://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1892&context=ealr.
[2] This story is told in many books, including Green Rage: Radical Environmentalism and the Unmaking of Civilization by Christopher Manes (1990), Freezing in the Dark: Money, Power, Politics, and the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy by Ron Arnold, R. (2007), and In a Dark Wood: The Fight Over Forests and the Rising Tyranny of Ecology by Alston Chase (1995).

IN ONLY 8 DAYS AS PRESIDENT, DONALD J. TRUMP HAS:

The Daily Win, DAY 8
1/28/2017 | By Laz A. Mataz 


  1. President Trump withdrew the U.S. From Climate & Environmental Accords, and cut funding to the UN by 40% via Executive Order.
  2. President Trump took it to the media (Donald Trump’s media summit was a ‘ __ing firing squad’)
  3. President Trump planned to dissolve 'Net Neutrality' (Trump transition team appointments indicate a bid to dismantle net neutrality)
  4. President Trump erased all mentions on the White House web site of “climate change” and "LGBT rights." He did that within one hour of taking the oath of office.
  5. President Trump issued an Executive order to “ease the burden of Obamacare”. He did so within hours of being sworn in.
  6. President Trump signed an Executive order withdrawing America from the widely-criticized Trans-Pacific-Partnership trade treaty
  7. President Trump returned the bust of Winston Churchill to the Oval Office
  8. President Trump issued an Executive order starting the construction of the border wall, and to strengthen immigration enforcement.