The Environmental Protection Agency: Congress should not reduce the regulatory authority of it.

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
The Environmental Protection Agency: Congress should not reduce the regulatory authority of it. by Mind Map: The Environmental Protection Agency: Congress should not reduce the regulatory authority of it.

1. Arguments

1.1. 1. The EPA regulations ensure basic health protection from all air pollution and toxins so their service is for the common good and therefore it should not be restricted. Air pollution and certain toxins can cause cancer, birth defects, long term injury to lungs, nerve and brain damage, and problems for people with asthma as well as the elderly. The EPA helped to prevent 205,00 premature deaths, 672,000 bronchitis cases, and 18 million child respiratory illnesses. Other pollutants can also deplete the ozone layer which leads to changes in the environment and increases in skin cancer and cataracts, because of this the EPA has ceased the production of most ozone-depleting chemicals. Ozone air quality has also improved in 95 of the 126 areas that were below average for air quality. 2. The EPA regulations ensure basic environmental protection from all air pollution and toxins. These regulations should not be restricted because toxic air pollutants can form acid rain and ground-level ozone (makes it harder to breathe) that can damage trees, crops, wildlife, lakes and other bodies of water. These pollutants can also harm fish and other aquatic life. With the EPA enforcing their regulations 50% of six common air pollutants have decreased, and toxins emitted from industrial sources have been reduced by 70%. Acid rain deposition has also decreased by more than 30% in the Midwest and the Northeast. 3. The EPA regulations also benefit the economy. Pollution causes thousands of illnesses leading to lost school and work days. Air pollution also reduces agriculture crop and commercial forest yields by billions of dollars each year. The EPA's regulations decrease pollution which decreases illness and lost school/work days and also increases agriculture crop and commercial forest. The EPA industry itself was generating $282 billion in revenues in 2007, and its Clean Air Act standards will prevent more than 3.2 million work days from being lost. Citations/Sources: (epa.gov) NOTE: The hyperlinks are not working because the website has included the ">." at the end as part of the url. To get them to work just remove them when going to the website. "Why Should You Be Concerned about Air Pollution? | Plain English Guide to The Clean Air Act." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 9 Dec. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/concern.html>. "Understanding the Clean Air Act | Plain English Guide to The Clean Air Act." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 9 Dec. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/understand.html>. "Highlights from the Clean Air Act 40th Anniversary Celebration." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/40th_highlights.html>.

2. Coach, Editor, and Director

2.1. Preparation

2.2. Collaboration

2.3. Clarity of Expression

2.4. Timing

2.5. Debate Format

2.6. Etiquette

3. Opening Statement

3.1. We believe the Congress should not reduce the regulatory authority of the Environmental Protection Agency.

3.2. The court case,Environmental Law Foundation v. Southern California Gas Company, shows how regulatory authority is important for environmental protection. Wells, which is belonged to the company, from underground gas storage reservoir were leaking and releasing toxic chemicals into water aquifers, which are protected sources of drinking water under California’s water quality protection plan. The Environmental Law Foundation filed the action in Los Angeles Superior Court alleging repeated violations of California's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, known as Proposition 65. That initiative strictly prohibits the discharge or release of any chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects into any actual or potential sources of drinking water. If Environmental agencies did not have enough regulatory authority, citizens living in California might still drink toxic water.

3.3. EPA was established because of elevated concern about environmental pollution, and it is established to consolidate in one agency a variety of federal research, monitoring, standard-setting and enforcement activities to ensure environmental protection. Since its inception, EPA has been working for a cleaner, healthier environment for the American people. EPA's regulation is helpful by getting toxic pollution out of our communities, and putting jobs and opportunities back in. EPA recycles 83 million tons of trash annually thats like cutting green house gas emissions from more than 33 million automobiles, and also it has helped create jobs for more than 3,300 Americans with average starting hourly wage at $14.26 to help clean and transform contaminated Brownfield sites into bustling neighborhoods and business centers.

3.4. The EPA protects the ecosystem that provides natural services for humans and all other species that are essential to our heath, quality of life and survival by writing and enforcing regulation based on laws passed by Congress.

4. Cross Examination

4.1. Opposition point: EPA is wasting money, and what EPA does is unconstitutional, and EPA has shirked some of its responsibilities.

4.1.1. 1. As you said, if EPA should have less regulatory authority, is there any other more efficient way to resolve environmental problem without EPA's regulation? 2. If so, what is evidence for it? 3. If EPA is unconstitutional, how is it established and still working ? 4. How are you going to explain the recent accomplishment of the EPA if EPA has shirked some of its responsibilities? 5. Do you have appropriate evidences or proofs for all of your argument? 6. What is the sources of all the evidences or proofs? 7. As you said, if EPA is wasting money, where does EPA waste money on? 8. If you said EPA waste money on environment, why is it wasting money?

5. Roles and Planning

5.1. Read Instruction, Rubrics, and Handouts.

5.2. Decide on roles and develop a plan for each day until the debate.

5.3. Complete Google Survey Debate Team Plan

6. Instructions, Rubrics, and Handouts

6.1. Debate Handout Form

6.1.1. http://www.mrcrissman.com/unit-four.html

6.2. Concept Map Directions

6.2.1. http://www.mrcrissman.com/unit-four.html

6.3. Concept Map Template

6.3.1. http://www.mrcrissman.com/unit-four.html

7. Research and Citations

7.1. NOTE: Urls do not work due to the ">." being including in the hyperlink. To go to website remove the ">." "POLL: Swing State Voters Support EPA Reining In Carbon From Power Plants." ThinkProgress RSS. Web. 8 Dec. 2014. <http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/10/29/2856351/poll-epa-regulations/>. "Why Should You Be Concerned about Air Pollution? | Plain English Guide to The Clean Air Act." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 9 Dec. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/concern.html>. "Understanding the Clean Air Act | Plain English Guide to The Clean Air Act." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 9 Dec. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/airquality/peg_caa/understand.html>. "Why Is It Important to Care About The Environment?"hiltonheadislandsc.gov. Web. 9. Dec. 2014<http://www.hiltonheadislandsc.gov/sustainability/whycare.cfm>"Highlights from the Clean Air Act 40th Anniversary Celebration." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.epa.gov/air/caa/40th_highlights.html>. "UNITED STATES v. DEATON." Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/021442.P.pdf>. "Current and Recent Cases."Environmental Law Foundation. Web. 10. Dec.2014. <http://www.envirolaw.org/current> "40 Years of Achievements, 1970-2010." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency. Web.10.Dec.2014 <http://www.epa.gov/40th/achieve.html>http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/ddt/01.htm http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/arp/ http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/trading/factsheet.html http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/airpage.nsf/webpage/Leaded+Gas+Phaseout http://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/lead.htm http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/insidest.html http://www.epa.gov/otaq/invntory/overview/solutions/vech_engines.htm http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/justice/01.htm http://portal.acs.org/preview/ http://www.epa.gov/epahome/r2k.htm "Despite Dire Predictions from the First Earth Day... - AEI." AEI. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.aei.org/publication/despite-dire-predictions-from-the-first-earth-day/>."National Employment Monthly Update." <i>National Employment Monthly Update</i>. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/national-employment-monthly-update.aspx>.

8. Rebuttal

8.1. Possible Opposing Side Arguments: The EPA will consume approximately $7.76 billion this year alone, so it's a waste of money. Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution does not authorize Congress to legislate in the area of the environment, therefore, it is unconstitutional. The EPA is inefficient and ineffective.

8.1.1. 1. If money is an issue the EPA has provided several billion dollars to states, local agencies, and tribal nations in funding. The U.S Gross Domestic Product has also tripled since the EPA was established in 1970, so the regulations and costs don't harm the economy.

8.1.2. 2. The supreme court ultimately has ruling over whether something is unconstitutional or not. And in the supreme court case UNITED STATES v. DEATON , James and Rebecca Deaton were sued by the government under the Clean Water Act because they refused to obtain a permit before digging a ditch and depositing excavated dirt in wetlands on their property. The Deatons’ main argument is that the government has no authority over the roadside ditch, and thus the agency cannot regulate their wetlands. Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause to protect navigable waters allows it to regulate the discharge of pollutants that flow into the ditch. So the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the EPA saying what they were doing was not unconstitutional.

8.1.3. One of the basic underlying arguments that the affirmative group had was that the Environmental Protection Agency is inefficient and ineffective. I’m here to tell you that that is wrong. The EPA has been extremely efficient and effective over the last 44 years since its establishment in 1970. Since congress passed the Clean Air Act in 1970, and the Clean Water Act in 1972, the size of our economy has doubled, we’ve cut pollution, promoted healthier families, created cleaner communities and we’ve made the country healthier. The EPA has gotten rid of toxic pollution out of communities and has put opportunities and jobs back in. For example, the EPA has cleansed 67% of contaminated sites around the nation. It has also created more than 3,400 jobs with the average starting hourly wage at $14.26.With a current unemployment rate of 5.8% in America today, creating new jobs like these are extremely beneficial. This has helped transform contaminated sites into new diverse communities and neighborhoods. The EPA has also been very efficient and effective in improving the quality of air we breathe. We breathe more than 11,000 liters of air daily so as you can see air quality is crucial. Now since the Clean Air Act was enacted 44 years ago, the EPA has reduced 60% of harmful airborne pollutants which cause smog, acid rain, lead poisoning, and many more. Just 20 years after this act was enacted, it prevented 205,000 premature deaths, 672,000 cases of chronic bronchitis, 21,000 cases of heart disease, 843,000 asthma attacks, 189,000 cardiovascular hospitalizations, its prevented 10.4 million lost I.Q. points in children from lead reductions, and 18 million child respiratory illnesses.(SHOW GRAPH) Not only has the EPA efficiently created a healthier America, but it has also financially helped Americans today. For example WaterSense-labeled products established by the EPA have helped consumers save 9.3 billion gallons of water annually, and helped consumers save more than $55 million in water and sewer bills in 2008. The EPA has also effectively improved our economy by increasing our gross domestic product by 204% meaning our nation is moving forward. Another example of how the EPA is efficient and effective is the Cuyahoga River in Ohio. In 1969 the Cuyahoga River was so polluted with industrial pollution and oily waste that caught fire. So compare the river in 1969 which was a year before the epa was established to now. So in a span of 40 years, the EPA has efficiently created a healthier more better America.

9. Closing Statement

9.1. Since EPA's regulation protects the ecosystem that provides natural services for humans and all other species that are essential to our heath, quality of life and survival, the congress should not reduce the regulatory authority of the EPA. Furthermore, its regulation ensures basic health and environmental protection from all air pollution and toxins and it even benefits economy. EPA's regulations helped at least millions of people in the U.S. by many factors such as providing jobs, preventing cancer, birth defects, respiratory diseases, and many other diseases. If EPA doesn't have enough regulatory authority to adjust environmental problem, EPA will lose their power to recover and prevent, and it will eventually causes elevated concern about environmental pollution.

9.2. Polluted environment makes large chance of unhealthiness because we are living in the environment. Since environment directly affect to our life, no one thinks polluted environment is better than clean environment, and EPA helps preventing and recovering polluted environment by enforcing regulation. Many EPA's regulations are not only for now but also for our future in Earth. Therefore, it is very important that the congress does not reduce the regulatory authority of the EPA.