House Republicans Pass Bill Forbidding Scientists from Advising EPA

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Nov 20, 2014.

  1. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    Well congress passed something to bad it was a bowl movement. The GOP is hellbent to get rid of the EPA I mean it is so bad keeping companies from killing us off and all thats so un jesus like and all.
    http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-po...ng-scientists-advising-epa-their-own-research
    Congressional climate wars were dominated Tuesday by the U.S. Senate, which spent the day debating, and ultimately failing to pass, a bill approving the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. While all that was happening, and largely unnoticed, the House was busy doing what it does best: attacking science.

    H.R. 1422, which passed 229-191, would shake up the EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board, placing restrictions on those pesky scientists and creating room for experts with overt financial ties to the industries affected by EPA regulations.

    The bill is being framed as a play for transparency: Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas, argued that the board’s current structure is problematic because it “excludes industry experts, but not officials for environmental advocacy groups.” The inclusion of industry experts, he said, would right this injustice.

    But the White House, which threatened to veto the bill, said it would “negatively affect the appointment of experts and would weaken the scientific independence and integrity of the SAB.”
     
  2. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #2
    Wake me up. I've had enough of this nightmare.
     
  3. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #3
    Had enough? It's just started.
     
  4. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #4

    Sad part it has not even started
     
  5. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #6
    Vote Republican- Ignorance and the celebration of it for a new America.
     
  6. MrWillie macrumors 65816

    MrWillie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Location:
    Starlite Starbrite Trailer Court
    #7
    Has anyone actually read the bill or did you just read the brainwashing website that was linked. (My guess is no).
     
  7. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #8
    229-191. Thought the republicans did not gain the majority till next year?
    Has anyone read the bill & who actually voted ?
     
  8. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #9
    The Republicans have had a majority in the House of Representatives since January 3, 2011 (after The Shellacking - Part One). H.R. 1422 passed the House with 229 for and 191 against. They break down:

    225 Republicans in favor
    4 Democrats in favor

    1 Republican against
    191 Democrats against

    7 Republicans not voting
    7 Democrats not voting

    The even number of members not voting isn't unusual. It's called pairing. It is but one example of the way gentlemen/gentleladies conduct politics. In non-critical votes, when certain members are unable to vote for some reason the other party has someone else not vote.

    Here's a link to who actually voted.
     
  9. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    Pairing is standard practice here too.
     
  10. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #11
    That's where we got it from.
     
  11. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #12
    I don't see a big issue with pairing to be honest. As long as the paired people are doing something else that's useful.

    It should bring more bipartisan cooperation as you have to work together and trust each other to do it.

    If anything the fact that only 7 democrats and republicans get on well enough to pair is the issue.

    ----------

    The EPA was setup under Nixon (R) and a lot of extra powers it got were under republican presidents.
     
  12. MrWillie macrumors 65816

    MrWillie

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2010
    Location:
    Starlite Starbrite Trailer Court
    #13
    I think you quoted the wrong post.
     
  13. Southern Dad macrumors 65816

    Southern Dad

    Joined:
    May 23, 2010
    Location:
    Georgia
    #14
    I wasn't pointing it out as a bad thing. Just clarifying an oddity.
     
  14. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #15
    I thought you were making an anti-politics point!

    ----------

    If it was ok to setup the EPA in this way when Nixon did it why does anyone want to change it now? Why should polluting businesses get a direct say?
     
  15. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #16
    Bible +1, Science -100
    Just what we need glorified paid industry lobbyists advising Congess on scientific matters in an official capacity. It's all part of the Master Plan to diminish science in favor of the Good Book and creating climates favorable for maximized industry profits. It will make God proud. :rolleyes: But It's enough to make me cry. How can we, by means of the GOP be so out of tune with the rest of the scientific world?

    Science in a Republican Senate: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

    James Inhofe Says the Bible Refutes Climate Change
    It's God who is pumping millions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, not us... :(
     
  16. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #17
    Of course not, that would downplay the sensationalism from the far left websites such as the one linked in the OP.

    Here's the text of the bill that was passed. Section B addresses membership.

    http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113hr1422eh/pdf/BILLS-113hr1422eh.pdf

    Section B(2)(c) and (d) say:

    Seems reasonable to me.
     
  17. Wild-Bill macrumors 68030

    Wild-Bill

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Location:
    bleep
    #18
    Because, thanks to things like Citizens United congress is beholden to their corporate masters, and not the American people.
     
  18. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #19
    What do you expect from a political party that believes evolution is a hoax, that the Earth is only 6,000-years-old, and that Jesus Christ rode a dinosaur like Fred Flintstone?

    That said, I'd love to see the EPA completely gutted and neutered. The EPA under Obama has an active anti-nuclear power agenda.
     
  19. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #20
    I'm anti-1960s era nuclear power due to the waste problem and tech issues illustrated by the Japanese disaster. New nuclear technology appears to be promising. Several countries are working on thorium reactors. Is the US moving ahead in this area?
     
  20. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #21
    I'm sure we're doing basic research on thorium but nothing commercially that I know of.

    Atomic Rod runs a pretty good pro-nuclear power blog with a lot of timely information:

    http://atomicinsights.com
     
  21. D.T. macrumors 604

    D.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Location:
    Vilano Beach, FL
    #22
    Well, some people know the truth ...

    [​IMG]
     
  22. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #23
    I hate that stupid tiny-headed iguana. Bring back Old Godzilla!
     

    Attached Files:

  23. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #24
    It does look kind of fat. :)

    ----------

    We had a thorium reactor back in the 1960s, but I believe the US opted for reactors associated with the production of nukes. Asgard's Fire.
     
  24. ElectronGuru macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2013
    Location:
    Oregon, USA
    #25
    House Republicans Pass Bill Forbidding Scientists from Advising EPA


    I don't see how (and thank you for finding the text). The point of the EPA is stopping organizations and people from damaging the environment. If they are lead by people who represent the interests of those same organizations, the EPA will be less effective. Unless thats the goal?

    If we are looking for examples of a reduced EPA world, we need only look at fracking (which is essentially immune to EPA requirements). We don't have factories any more like China, but transportation and power generation remain as sources of pollution that continue to threaten health and happiness.
     

Share This Page