EPA’s Great Lakes program worthwhile
Around here, a vote on “most disliked federal agency” would be no contest. The Environmental Protection Agency would win, hands down.
Much of what the EPA does is necessary, however. The agency’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative falls into that category.
Many Ohioans are well aware of problems in the lakes, especially Lake Erie. Toxic algae and invasive species including the Asian carp are serious, growing threats to water quality and the lakes’ environmental stability.
For several years, the EPA has been battling such concerns through direct federal action and funding of state initiatives. According to one report, Ohio has received more than $200 million for the purpose since 2011.
But President Donald Trump — justifiably concerned about the EPA’s overreach in authority on matters such as carbon emissions — wants to slash the agency’s funding. He would reduce funding for the GLRI, now set at about $300 million a year, to just $10 million.
That simply is not enough.
Every EPA project and program should be examined to ensure it is necessary, based on science — and constitutional. That includes the GLRI. If some of its intiatives are not proper, they should be suspended.
But crippling the campaign entirely would not be wise. With encouragement from Ohio members of Congress, Trump should rethink his plan so the Great Lakes are not permitted to become a giant cesspool.
——
Some U.S. senators would do the nation a favor if they pondered who and what they are discussing in this week’s confirmation hearings for federal Judge Neil Gorsuch, who has been nominated for the U.S. Supreme Court.
During opening statements Monday by members of the Judiciary Committee, some Democrat senators focused criticism on President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “Most Americans question whether we need a Supreme Court justice with the vision of Donald Trump,” commented Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill.
Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., questioned support of Gorsuch by groups that are “anti-choice, anti-environment and pro-corporate.”
But neither Trump nor those supporting Gorsuch will ever have a vote on the Supreme Court.
It is the character of just one person, Neil Gorsuch, that senators should discuss. And the only important issue is his understanding of the Constitution and his fidelity to it. Nothing else matters in deciding whether he should become a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
COMMENTS