This is a very different viewpoint of the EPA than you will normally find here. But it is a sound one. You decide.
From the Walton Sun in Georgia
Many of my Facebook friends (and some Growler Garage cohorts) support eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I disagree and let me share some anecdotes to explain why. Before Republican President Richard Nixon established the EPA in 1970, here's what was going on in my hometown of Bainbridge, Georgia, which straddles the Flint River.
In those days, Bainbridge dumped raw sewage into the Flint, we called it the Honey Hole. We were dumb country boys; we didn't know any better. Whatever gets flushed in the Flint eventually ends up in Apalachicola Bay, home of the world's best oysters and a vibrant part of the Big Bend economy.
NOTE: We do not agree with this author's well-spoken and sensible position about the need for the EPA, but many of you will. We totally understand the idea of needing protection, but to imagine that protection is coming or ever will come from a federal agency whose primary purpose in life is to grow - not to achieve its stated goals - seems not to work out all that well in the end. The concept is wonderful. But the reality of large-scale bureacracies actually working is unproven to us personally.