EPA:
Our Mission
The mission of EPA is to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment -- air, water and land -- upon which life depends.
EPA's purpose is to ensure that:
- all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn and work;
- national efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information;
- federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively;
- environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;
- all parts of society -- communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments -- have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;
- environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse, sustainable and economically productive; and
- the United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment.
I'm not sure who you're referring to as the "right winger" who is asking for the government to step in, but the mere existence of the EPA suggests that the government SHOULD step in to ensure that BP does clean up the mess...COMPLETELY. No one (well, at the very least, I'm not) is asking for the government to do the "cleaning up".
I agree with you. It is BP's responsibility. But that being said, I find it ironic that the government wants to get involved with our daily lives and regulate our fat intake, yet they didn't impose regulations - such as make the $500,000 protective pressure valve gauge - a requirement on offshore rigs.
Um, first, I am a mother. And yes, I know the educational system sucks - that's why I paid for private school. No it wasn't easy, my husband worked two jobs and I worked full time as well.
Second, I'm NOT a right winger...I'm slightly right of the center and am part of the Conservative movement. It's not about cutting taxes. (not unless the government is going to cut out all the fat) It's not about seeing people starve in the streets. It's about bringing back decent humanity to each individual. It's about values. It's about compassion, charity, hope, faith (however you interpret faith).
Third, my husband is a police officer. So no, I am not against them getting a raise. Oh, and btw - he too is a Conservative.
Nothing. Because Bush cut taxes but didn't cut spending. (FYI - I didn't like Bush either. Oh, and I am a registered Democrat)
It is possible to cut spending without doing the things you mentioned (cutting raises from teachers, police, firemen, etc) but the government would have you think otherwise. Oh and btw - the federal government doesn't pay the wages of firemen and police. Those wages are paid at the city government level.
Unemployment is a government-run agency. It's not covered by a regulatory agency. Where were the regulatory agencies with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Oh yeah, those were government agencies as well. But they're not greedy, are they?????
Now you're calling ME greedy selfish because I want capable individuals to be responsible for their own actions. heh. I've never exhibited the qualities you're accusing me of. But I guess your post won't be considered inflammatory.