Would President Obama's Environmental Protection Agency really force
Americans to pay a tax on "rainwater runoff" from homes and small
You bet they would. In fact, the EPA, under radical environmentalist Lisa
Jackson, is proposing regulations to do just that.
Take a look at the EPA's own Federal Register filing, where the EPA
generally describes the initiative it's proposing:
...requirements, including design or performance standards, for stormwater
discharges from, at minimum, newly developed and redeveloped sites. EPA
intends to propose regulatory options that would revise the NPDES
regulations and establish a comprehensive program to address stormwater
discharges from newly developed and redeveloped sites and to take final
action no later than November 2012.
This is bureaucratic-speak for having the EPA force cities and counties to
limit stormwater runoff to levels the EPA deems acceptable. Limiting
"rainwater runoff" will mean forcing homeowners and businesses to pay new
taxes in order to rein in rainwater, and that's no pun intended.
Think about just how big-government this is. A Washington, D.C. bureaucracy
plans on forcing your local county or city to slap new taxes on you and me
because this big-government bureaucracy wants to micro-manage rainwater
across the entire country. Already, several counties and cities across the
United States are moving to pass new taxes and fees in anticipation of the
new EPA rules, including cities in states as disparate as Florida, Ohio and
But really, this new EPA outrage is part of the pattern of the Obama
Administration. Cap-and-trade is bogged down for now in the Senate (though
they'll try to bring it back this year), so the liberals try to use an
un-elected bureaucracy to pass their radical agenda. First, they declared
that greenhouse gases are a "threat" to the environment and to health, so
they're pushing new regulations that will in effect pass cap-and-trade
without Congress having to act. Now, they're pushing this new "rainwater
I don't have a URL, but I've read the proposal. It's real.
Not only would all new construction require an EPA permit for
'rainwater management', but also all RESALE of property ( like a
house ) would require the same permit / certification, with any
required retrofits being done and inspected before you can sell your
They want to do the same thing with insulation, efficiency,
'Energy Star' rating, etc. IOW, before you sell your 50 year old
house, you would have to get it inspected for 'efficiency', add
insulation, replace appliances, etc, until the government was happy.
Click here every day to feed an animal that needs you today !!!
Yeah..With hot checks and high hopes that China doesn't dump our
IOU's. It was a questionable plan from the beginning. Oh thats right...
Bush set that plan in action and Obama continued it. Also Obama was
going to get us out of that mess in the ME that Bush got us into. Can
you see any difference between the two on these issues? Our budget
deficit is now $1.7 Trillion and our debt has leaped to $12.8 Trillion
Israel basically spit in the face of Obama and yet he wants to attack
Iran for them.
During the great depression< Heating guys were overworked and got very
wealthy. The markets are vastly overpriced today. If they were
liquidated for value..Investors would lose their ass. If our overseas
debt were called in today..We would be flat screwed. Most of our top
manufacturing jobs have been outsourced to other countries..Do you think
maybe we could outsource your Unions and our moronic Government and
maybe come out ahead?
If the recession had turned the corner, I would be runnin my ass off doing
service, not system replacements. I have been installing 1 - 2 systems a
week, and have only been getting 1 or 2 calls for service. All but 2 of the
system replacements have been for existing customers, the rest have been
from word of mouth. The calls I am getting are "We are ready for a new
system, come pick up a deposit check. When can you install it?" No bidding,
and they are not calling anybody else.
The only thing I can figure is that folks are still stinging from their
winter heating bills, and figure there is going to be a record long, hot
summer, and/or they are tired of being screwed over by the cheapest price,
and now they want it done right. I dunno.
You can bet that treasury destroying stimulus for energy conservative
equipment is helping our industry. The Energy companies have received a
huge amount of stimulus money from the Feds plus the 30% tax rebate
to the Home owners. Not to mention the kickback from the manufacturers.
Maybe we too can get subsidized like the Corn farmers. They lose about
$30/acre and that is made up by roughly a total subsidy of $128/acre.
So maybe if you can lose money every year, a subsidy will make you rich.
Remember our national Mott!
1 Drink yourself Sober.
2 Eat yourself Thin
3 Spend yourself Rich
We can save our industries by exporting Unionism to the 3rd world
countries. I just have got to buy a Toyota so that I too can get rich
with a bullshit Lawsuit. I kind of wonder if these idiots didn't leave
cruise control in standby and accidentally hit resume.
Scare tactic that has it backwards. We've had this for years in the
Twin Cities metro area, for a very good reason: to keep taxes _down_.
Too much storm water runoff from properties overwhelms municipal
sewage treatment systems. You either have to spend money on new
treatment plants, or keep the storm water out of the system. So in the
Twin Cities, the stormwater inflow is monitored and measured on a
municipal basis, and the cities that put a disproportionate amount of
runoff into the system are fined. Those cities can either raise their
taxes to pay the fines, or require property owners to reduce the
amount of runoff from their properties. My city has several approaches
- as streets are built/rebuilt, they're constructed to a new,
narrower, standard (there was no standard width in the past); they
landscape shallow swales on the edges of adjacent properties to keep
water out of the storm drains; they give property owners the
opportunity to have rain gardens dug on the edge of their properties.
They also require all sump pumps and downspouts to discharge onto the
owner's property, not into the sanitary sewer.
The whole point is to reduce the burden on a taxpayer-supported common
utility. Properties that produce a disproportionate amount of runoff
are responsible for dealing with it, or paying for it. Better them
than all of us.
Most localities have ordinances with similar concern and
intent, enacted by LOCAL ELECTED officials.
Is this something you feel is appropriate for a FEDERAL
regulation ( as opposed to your local ordinance ) ?
And something that you feel should be written, enacted, and
enforced by unelected bureaucrats in DC ( The EPA ) ?
BTW - if the EPA rules happen to be tougher, or even just
'different' than your existing local ones, you will be personally
financially responsible for bringing your property up to 'Washington
If you don't like it - write a letter to Washington, you won't
get to speak to or at your next local town council meeting, because
the Federal rules supercede your local ones.
Don't worry, be happy.
Click here every day to feed an animal that needs you today !!!
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.