Michele Bachmann Wants to Get Rid of the EPA

In the first presidential debate for the 2012 primary election season, CNN hosted 7 candidates in New Hampshire.

One comment made by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) was that we need to get rid of the “job-killing” Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Unless you replace it with something comparable or better, this is a terrible idea. The EPA is responsible for clean air, water, and natural resources in the U.S.

What would happen without the EPA? Here’s a sneak peak:

  • Because companies wouldn’t have environmental standards, they wouldn’t have to worry about cleaning up toxic waste, spending money on clean coal, or protecting wildlife.
  • Acid rain would ruin crops, forests, etc…
  • Rivers, lakes, and streams would be contaminated. In many cases, our drinking water would be too.

Not to mention the fact that the EPA actually creates jobs. If the EPA goes away, people will lose jobs.

What do you think about Bachmann’s statement? Should we get rid of the EPA?

More information can be found here.

This entry was posted in Eco News. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Michele Bachmann Wants to Get Rid of the EPA

  1. Jack says:

    The EPA has become nothing more than a front for the communist “green” movement. You will have to do your own reading, it’s not my job to educate you, but the EPA has been responsible of outlawing the use of chemicals like CFL’s and Freon, based on the kind of science that gave us the “global warming hoax”.

    Acid rain never happened anywhere on the planet. I remember life long before the EPA. The USA was not polluted then and it certainly is not now. Don’t let them lie your future away from you. Oh, and the Ozone layer has had a hole in it since it was discovered so to claim it should not have a hole is stupid.

  2. Amy Erickson says:


    Thank you for your opinion. It appears that we have differing views on this topic, but I always welcome a friendly debate. Unfortunately, trying to convince a recycling company not to be green won’t work too well 🙂 I mean, we have “All Green” in our name.

    Parts of the USA are probably (relatively) fine, but parts are definitely polluted. I can see it. I live in the LA area and while the smog and air quality has improved, it is pretty bad– especially when you compare it to central Oregon where I went to college.

    Acid rain has happened, I don’t know why you would claim it hasn’t. The pH of rain is easily measured and a fact– whether or not you think it is bad is your opinion. Distilled water is neutral with a pH of 7, but the CO2 in the atmosphere reacts with rainwater to give it an acidic pH of 5.7-7. So even regular rain is acidic by definition. Any pH lower than 5 can cause problems for wildlife.

    No government organization is perfect, but we do need something to regulate the environment.

  3. theresa says:

    I wanted so badly to like and vote for Michelle. I guess that can never happen now. The environment is always number ONE. From it gives life and from it takes life. I will not ever vote for a monster that wants to destroy what mother nature has given us.

    • Amy Erickson says:

      I’m just sad that anyone can think like that. Michelle wasn’t my favorite candidate to begin with, but how can the environment NOT be a priority for someone?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *