With a proposed $8.2 billion budget and over 15,000 employees to provide for, the "Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)" has come a long way since President Richard Nixon signed an executive order to begin their unconstitutional work in December of 1970.
The purpose of the EPA, as stated on their website, is to "protect human health and the environment."
However, in what has now become a disaster three times as large as originally reported, the EPA is responsible for spilling several million gallons of toxic waste replete with toxins like arsenic and mercury, at astounding levels, into a tributary of the Animas River in Colorado.
This spill has exposed residents in three states, to which CNN reported, "An array of health problems from cancer to kidney disease to developmental problems in children."
In order to be proactive about the forthcoming lawsuits, the EPA is now trying to entice members of the Navajo Nation to "waive rights to future compensation for damages incurred by the toxic spill"—a spill that some have suggested was intentional to secure mega-funding for a new treatment plant.
So what happens to this unelected agency when it threatens and harms human health and the environment? If we follow the modern day political ideology, we will give it more funding and expand its jurisdiction so it can enforce the president's new Clean Power regulations. Yet, Thomas Jefferson warned us "...in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution..."
We would do well to remember the mischief of the EPA in Wyoming when welder Andy Johnson was accused of violating the Clean Water Act by building a pond in his back yard. The EPA's threats in that case included a $75,000-a-day fine.
Or do you recall when the EPA tried to subject the Sackett family of Idaho to a similar $75,000-a-day fine over claims that the construction of their new home was interfering with wetlands?
I don't want to be overly critical, but even if the EPA did help protect human health and the environment, that still would not make it right.
Look under the "Chains" of Article One, Section Eight, of the U.S. Constitution and see if you discover some authority for Congress to enact laws regarding the environment, which includes the water, within the boundaries of these United States. You won't discover such authority because it is not there!
So, what is known as the "Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)" has no Constitutional underpinning – no support – and has, therefore, no LEGAL standing. There is no reason, therefore, for any state or county to comply with any standards or requirements published by the EPA or any other federal agency or department.
Way back in 1776, the Founders of America knew this truth and spoke this truth. They called these kinds of actions on the part of Parliament's "pretended legislation."
Please remember that Acts of Congress and unelected agencies are not necessarily binding on the states.
Let me say that again: Acts of Congress and unelected agencies are not always binding on the states.
When are they binding? Simply stated, they are only binding if they are lawful—that is, when they do not conflict with the Constitution and with the Law of Nature and Nature's God. When they are not lawful, they are "pretended legislation," and the States are supposed to declare them as null and void and of no effect in the state.
This is the Doctrine of Nullification and it is as American as baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie.
Learn more about your Constitution with Jake MacAulay and the Institute on the Constitution and receive your free gift.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.