West Virginia water contamination

Post Reply New Topic

I was going to post this in news and current events, but it is likely to end up a political free for all, so here it is:

Link to news story here

A chemical spill in West Virginia (chemicals used to wash coal prior to shipment) contaminated the water supply for 300,000 residents. The ban on drinking water is now being lifted for some.

How many people out there still believe we should abolish the Environmental Protection Agency?

I'm all for more EPA control.The rich that profit from coal don't have to drink the water.In the county above me was an EPA superfund site,the wood treatment plant had dumped chemicals into the ground and contaminated the drinking water.
More on the chemical leak.
http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2 ... water.html
http://www.policymic.com/articles/78955 ... -until-now

No surprise the Republicans are already blaming Obama for this disaster. And you can bet those same Republicans will raise hell before giving the EPA more control.

Sigh

I still do - in their current form, they provide no meaningful benefit to anyone and are not much more than a tax burden.

Fold the regulatory aspects of the agency into the Department of the Interior, and create a department within the FBI for enforcement of environmental protection laws and give them law enforcement powers and you have a chance of actually doing some good.

So just to clarify, your position is "we need government-funded environmental protection, but the current EPA are not delivering it and reform is needed"?

(I just want to eliminate doubt)

I don't have an opinion on the matter.

However ...

1. You don't establish why West Virginia cannot take care of itself. Why does there need to be a federal entity?

2. The environmental damage occurred and was not prevented, so this does not seem like a very good article to use
to argue the need for a protection agency.

3. What should the EPA have done do to prevent this from happening ? Isn't this a failure of the EPA ?

If you pour burnt motor oil down the storm drain I think you should be caned.Just my opinion.

It's more than reform. The EPA is a distinct, separate government agency that has no official cabinet representation - receives very little funding, and has a huge mission statement. It was broken from the minute it was founded - and there are already government agencies in place to do the same thing much better.

Plus, the EPA has no power to throw someone in jail for willful and repeated violations of the environmental protection laws, all they can do is continue to fine people. That doesn't change anything when the fines are viewed as another cost of doing business.

It seems obvious that environmental protection is inherently a federal issue - the ramifications of a significant environmental disaster in one state almost always affect neighboring states. We need a consistent set of laws that everyone needs to follow regardless of geographic boundaries.

That's why it's best to do that inside.
Out of sight, out of mind....

^^^So if you had a water well, and caught someone pouring crap in it,what would you do?I doubt you would watch meekly from the window.

No, you'd shoot them like a good little libertarian. (/sarcasm)

I thought we libertarians were supposed to be in favor of pollution.

If you're going to misrepresent my views, could you at least try and be consistent about it?

Dox, first, this wasn't about you. Second, I have never said that 'libertarians are in favor of pollution.' I *have* made the point that libertarians don't have ideas for effective processes to deal with pollution, and the post above was consistent with that.

Sure they do.

I'm a libertarian, and I just presented my idea for effective processes to deal with pollution.

Let's debate the issue based on its merits, instead of blind conjecture.

I get this feeling that an aweful lot of people on this forum don't actually understand what libertarianism, anarchism, minarchism etcetera etcetera, actually are. I don't claim all statists are the same*, so why do statists claim that all anarchists are the same? Indeed, a strong regime of property rights would be very environmentally friendly, because if you pollute someones water well, you will be liable for the cost of cleaning it up and putting things right, and will be prevented from doing so again - much as if you'd gone and smashed up their house.

*Unless I'm talking about how disgusting their views are - the only somewhat tolerable statists are Georgist minarchists.

A fertilizer plant deep in red territory explodes, wiping out most of the town of West, TX. It hadn't been inspected since the 80's.
A coal processing plant leaks industrial chemicals into a primary water supply in the deep-red West Virginia, just north of Charleston. The container hasn't been inspected since the 90's.

Gee wiz, you destroy all regulation and eliminate funding to basic infrastructure and things start crumbling? Who could have guessed? Oh well, Wall Street's doing good, and those hedge funds are healthier than ever!