The Environmental Protection Agency, under court order to redefine its standard for particulates in the air, has revealed its new set of guidelines and restrictions. The EPA's new proposal, released November 27, 1997, is directed at tightening its standards of air pollution to levels for which its instrumentation is incapable of accurately determining in more than three locations in the nation.
Spokesman for the Big Three automakers accuse the EPA of "moving the goalpost" to a position that "could kill Michigan." The lobbying organization for the three major car makers, the American Automobile Manufacturers Association, claims that the EPA's proposed regulations, if adopted, would put that government agency in control of the nation's economy.
When one examines the astronomical funding the Clinton Administration is proposing for its counter terrorism program and compares it with the need based on actual incidents and casualties, it appears ridiculous in the extreme. Now the government is introducing a piece of administrative law that upon close examination makes about the same amount of sense. The EPA again appears to be pursuing a gnat with a howitzer.
Under the new standards ozone levels will be reduced by thirty per cent. Dust particulates will be set at 2.5 microns or less, reducing by seventy-five per cent the current 10 micron limit. A micron is one millionth of a meter or approximately 4 millionths of an inch; 2.5 microns corresponds to about 1/30th the diameter of a human hair.
On the surface these regulations appear innocuous and an indication of genuine concern for the health of American citizens. Looking beneath the surface, however, it can be observed that these proposals may be devastating to small business and cost metropolitan cities enormous amounts of money to implement. Estimates run from three to seven billion dollars for cities like Chicago. The real intent behind the EPA's new regulations seem to be the same as those the government has for its intended assault on domestic terrorism, i.e. control and limitation, especially individual travel and freedom of movement. To accomplish this it must have a tight- fisted, far-reaching control over states and cities.
The new EPA proposals, which must undergo extensive review before implementation, are expected to result in restrictions on American lives heretofore unprecedented. CNN reported opponents as claiming that "states and cities may have to impose Draconian pollution controls, including travel restrictions, mandatory car pooling, construction caps and curbs on the use of everything from pleasure boats to lawn mowers.
Another result will be further subjugation of municipal and state governments under the heel of the federal government. By making the standards more rigid, it will then make those metropolitan areas that are not presently in compliance with current, much looser standards, appear all the more illegal. This will result in giving the national government more leverage to force all manner of legislative controls upon them.
Despite the regulations already in place and the expenditure of billions of dollars by industry directed at compliance, there are still 74 major metropolitan areas out of compliance with existing federal standards. Under the new set of standards that would jump to a whopping 214. One opponent stated that air quality will not increase just because the EPA enacts tighter standards.
Among those dignitaries of history who spoke against the New World Order and its methods was John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York just a few years prior to the Great Depression. Mayor Hylan once said, "The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation." His statement now appears as much prophetical as historical.
The term "Environmental Terrorism" could well be applied to the EPA. The terror or fear comes in many ways. For example, when an individual, who thinks he owns his land, wants to drain some water off of part of his property so he can use it more to his advantage, he could now face immense fines or even jail. This for doing what was once thought his right to do. But environmental terrorism wrought by the EPA claims that wetlands must be preserved regardless of who owns them. Now one no longer must stop paying property taxes to find out who really owns the land. All one have to do is dry it out a little.
Does any thinking person really believe that the protection of the American lungs or some soggy turf is actually the reason for these nonsense administrative actions? Or is there seen a deeper, more sinister motive underlying the activities of government?
When Coca Cola must obtain a special permit while transporting its soft drink syrup over state and national highways because its acidity level exceeds Federal safety and environmental guidelines; when it is an environmentally reportable incident if one spills a bag of table salt on the ground; when the government digs its way into the minutest corners of the private citizen's life by these and innumerable other articles of legislative and administrative flotsam, can we not see the clear signs of the demise of a nation's freedom?
It was thought during the nuclear arms race that the world might end with a bang. Then when environmentalism came into fashion some said it would end with a whimper or a gasp. No one ever foresaw that it might be crushed under the weight of vexatious legislation.
"And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye load men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers." Luke 11:46.
Contact The WINDS webmaster.