Trump administration tells EPA to cut climate page from website: sources

Agree, when a Federal Agency seeks to expand in areas that were not originally mandated by the taxpayer it is a warning sign that spending is getting out of control at that specific agency.

SGT Victoria Belbusti - Your mixing up political fights / emotions with taxpayer spending, you either need to seperate the two or watch the country go bankrupt. Up to you. We can't afford to have Federal Agencies go off and decide how to spend our money on their own and in fact it is illegal to do so even though some Federal Agencies are doing that. It is runaway bureaucracy. Congress appropriates taxpayer funds for specific use at each agency. Congress also approves the mandate of each agency. For a Federal Agency to assume the power of Congress........you might as well just hand them your wallet and keys to your house because they will not stop until every penny is gone. Thats precisely why we have both Financial and Legislative controls over Federal Agencies and each one has a mission statement that covers their Taxpayer sourced mandate. Also, why they are audited.

Fine a volcano?
Exactly! No more private jets! Sustainable energy is what we need to start working toward.SSG(P) (Join to see) -

SPC Erich Guenther - I don't disagree with you. I'm mixing nothing up. The EPA is a horrible agency.

I find it mind boggling that we ignore scientific evidence and politicize it.

SGT Victoria Belbusti - Exactly. All that "Global Climate Warming Change" nonsense used to extort industry and scare people into compliance/submission. All the while its chief proponents jet around the world to spread their lies and eco-extortion.

Humans are a pimple on the butt of the Earth. The Earth will survive long after we are gone, and it can and will self-recover.

SGT (Join to see) - Using the same philsophy of unlimited missions of any Federal Agency you espoused above. Then NASA, NOAA, National Weather Service, etc, etc should all duplicate and spend the taxpayers money in the same way that EPA has. Why have just one agency related to climate violating it's legal mandate when you can have 5 or 6 doing the same and wasting gobs of taxpayer money with replication. Problem is that WE THE TAXPAYERS are in charge of what a agency looks into NOT THE AGENCY itself. So unless there is a legal mandate to study the climate the EPA is spending money it has no legal right to spend. Now if you want the EPA to study the climate, get Congress to change it's legal mandate.

SPC Erich Guenther - that's all well and good but "climate" is part of the environment. So EPA is doing their job by being concirned with climate change. NOAA, NASA, AND the NWA do have some overlap, especially since they all share tools to get the job done. How about you imagine the cost if instead of relying on NWS equipment and NOAA satellites launched by NASA, each agency had to stand up the entire program by themselves. It's a cooperative effort. And all you want to do is nip it in the bud. Maybe humans are causing the climate change, maybe not. Frankly I don't care, humans can stop it. But instead of listening to facts and evidence, the people in power aren't even too busy counting their bribes... Oh I'm sorry, I mean wholesome lobbiest donations.

SGT (Join to see) - Actually, no EPA is going beyond the mandate set by Congress. All the money they spent on the Climate Change webpage was unauthorized spending. No different than if you got money for uniform replacement and spent it on booze instead and your uniforms as a result of lack of replacement look like crap now. Same thing. EPA = United States jurisdictional limitation, meaning ends at our borders. Climate Change = Worldwide.

SPC Erich Guenther - I guess this needs to be stripped down to the core, do you believe the climate is changing dangerously fast due to human influences and we need all hands on deck to do something about it? If you do, then we can go further into what you and I seem to disagree on various federal agency's scopes, if you don't. Then I'm going to have to back out, because in that case you simply wouldn't be worth my time.