Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 2822

Funding the EPA, the Department of the Interior, and Other Agencies for FY 2016

Argument in favor

This bill authorizes sensible funding levels for all the covered agencies, and allows the EPA to focus on enforcing existing regulations rather than creating new job-killing regulations.

Tom's Opinion
···
06/25/2015
Actually, I would say cut their budget to zero. If we can't do that, keep it to minimum.
Like (19)
Follow
Share
jackson's Opinion
···
06/24/2015
The EPA has its teeth sunk into everything. Businesses of all sizes are crippled by its regulations and expanding its budget will be more hurtful than helpful. It's ironic that we allow these regulations to pass in the name of clean air while American businesses are so pinned down that they are suffocating in the bureaucratic smog.
Like (9)
Follow
Share
···
06/27/2015
In my opinion it is still too much for the EPA, they have been political hit men for the administration killing our economy with their junk science agenda. Their budgets have been bloated under this and previous administrations with not enough oversight by the legislative branch who should be the ONLY branch to make laws and rules that effect us all by penalty. Think about what authority the EPA has and rules and fines they can impose all by non-elected branch of govt!
Like (6)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Cutting the EPA’s budget is an overtly political gesture that will only reduce its ability to create and enforce new regulations that otherwise would have improved air and water quality.

John's Opinion
···
06/23/2015
The EPA is one of the few regulatory agencies that still has teeth and still looks out for the American people. With climate change being such an emergency, their funding should be increased, not decreased.
Like (66)
Follow
Share
joshualogancook's Opinion
···
06/26/2015
The EPA needs more teeth, more financing, and more scientific data. Hamstringing this department has negative implications for the land on which we live. We must be stewards of this great nation. Not merely exploiting it for profit.
Like (30)
Follow
Share
BananaNeil's Opinion
···
06/26/2015
This bill cuts way too much money from the EPA. Come on guys, the environment is important.
Like (16)
Follow
Share
    Actually, I would say cut their budget to zero. If we can't do that, keep it to minimum.
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    The EPA is one of the few regulatory agencies that still has teeth and still looks out for the American people. With climate change being such an emergency, their funding should be increased, not decreased.
    Like (66)
    Follow
    Share
    The EPA needs more teeth, more financing, and more scientific data. Hamstringing this department has negative implications for the land on which we live. We must be stewards of this great nation. Not merely exploiting it for profit.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill cuts way too much money from the EPA. Come on guys, the environment is important.
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    This isn't a funding bill, it's a de-funding bill.
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    The EPA has its teeth sunk into everything. Businesses of all sizes are crippled by its regulations and expanding its budget will be more hurtful than helpful. It's ironic that we allow these regulations to pass in the name of clean air while American businesses are so pinned down that they are suffocating in the bureaucratic smog.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Environmental protection is of paramount importance. Opponents to the EPA cite regulation as "job killing," when the transition to cleaner and renewable energy needs to happen -- yesterday. For the public's health, safety, and protection of our nation -- environmental security is national security.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    In my opinion it is still too much for the EPA, they have been political hit men for the administration killing our economy with their junk science agenda. Their budgets have been bloated under this and previous administrations with not enough oversight by the legislative branch who should be the ONLY branch to make laws and rules that effect us all by penalty. Think about what authority the EPA has and rules and fines they can impose all by non-elected branch of govt!
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    We need adequate funding to ensure legislation that will protect our health and environment.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    The EPA needs to be stronger and not cut down in size/strength. The private sector will take advantage of the weakened EPA, further damaging the environment. Also any talk of job creation through less regulation is poppycock. Saving an entire ecosystem is worth so much more than 15 people getting jobs.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Considering the state of our environment and man's obvious impact therein which is undisputed (except by a a very small minority of "paid for" Scientists) cutting back funding is ill advised. This is neither a rational, wise or ethical proposition but one clearly supported by big oil and the dirty fuels businesses.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    I wish everyone would read this summary. A NAY vote means not cutting funding to the EPA.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    To cut funding for the EPA would make sense with our current policies of raping the Earth. So, as long as you're cool with raping the Earth some more, vote yes.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely mind-boggling to cut funding. EPA is one of the most successful US institutions, keeping Americans safe and preserving our country for our children.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    We need as much money as possible in the EPA and Dept. of the Interior! These are crucial agencies that affect our immediate future!
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Climate issues are not partisan issues. We need to give the EPA every advantage in protecting the planet for future generations.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    The percentage of the overall budget is still so small, no reason the cuts need to be made here. Give the EPA their requested amount.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    It is enough. I am always having to make due with less. Why should the government not have the same thriftiness? Besides I am always for smaller government and balanced budgets.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    We need to invest more in the EPA, not less. If we damage our planet beyond repair, nothing else matters.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Environment has to come first. Even before mild fluctuations in employment
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE