Wednesday, April 06, 2011

Good. Stepp to Hold Off on Phosphorus Regs

Good decision, Ms. Stepp.

Gov. Scott Walker's administration has abandoned plans to scale back Wisconsin's new phosphorus pollution limits, opting instead to delay putting them in effect for two years, the state Department of Natural Resources secretary told lawmakers Monday.

Cathy Stepp told the Legislature's budget committee that the governor wants to see how other Midwestern states and federal environmental officials deal with the phosphorus problem before going any further.

Maybe if Doylet's DNR hadn't installed "the toughest regs in the USA" this wouldn't have to happen. But as we all know, for the Democrats, cost is no object if it's other people's money.

16 comments:

John Foust said...

And the Republican drumbeat for war is funded by what?

neomom said...

Who is drum-beating for Libya and Afghanistan now John?

John Foust said...

Obama, of course. Wrong then, wrong now. You support the war spending, do you?

neomom said...

In fact I believe we should leave AfPak and should have never entered Libya. But it isn't the topic of the post - you simply brought it up to be a pain and change the subject. I was pointing out your rank hypocrisy.

Caleb Foust! said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
John Foust said...

No rank hypocrisy that I can see. Dad29's issue was the cost of politician actions. Republicans push costs on taxpayers and their grandkids, too.

Deekaman said...

If you'd like to compare balance sheets between Republican and Democrat spending, I think that can be arranged and you would lose.

John Foust said...

War spending?

neomom said...

Focus John,

I don't think Cathy Stepp or Scott Walker or even the Fitzgeralds have authorized any war funding.

You may have to ask Herb Kohl though.

neomom said...

But to get back on topic....

Good for Cathy!!! Those phosphorus regs are stupid anyway since the WW facilities aren't the driver to the levels anyway.

Nothing like the Environmental Weenies to go after the wrong thing for the sole purpose of making a basic necessity like water more expensive for everyone. But hey, hippies only like to shower every few days anyway right? Why should the rest of us want to shower every day.

John Foust said...

Focus, Neo. Dad29 was implying a general Democrat "cost is no object if it's other people's money." That's what I responded to. Why would he ignore the crazy spending of the Republicans that he himself voted for?

neomom said...

Sure John - lets put some facts in OK...

FY2007 - the last year of Booooosh and the Evil Republican House (pursestrings and all) the Federal government spent $2.7T

FY2010 - with Nancy and Obama in charge - the Feds spent $3.6T

That would be a 33% increase in spending by DEMOCRATS in just 3 short years.

The deficit reflects that. The deficit in 2007 was about $300B, in 2008 about $500B and by 2010 about 1.3T and anticipated to be about 1.6T for 2011.

Sorry buddy, Democrats own this one now.

John Foust said...

And Bush increased the spending by what fraction, and increased the deficit by what fraction?

I thought we agreed that we all own this now.

neomom said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
neomom said...

FY2001 spending (last year of Clinton budget) was $1.9T

So Republicans/Compassionate Conservatives increased spending by $700B over 6 years. They sucked.

Democrats/Progressives increased spending by $900B over 3 years.

They suck more.

Obambi campaigned on cutting the deficit in half by the end of his first term. He also said that iff'n we spend all that stimulus money, unemployment would never get above 8%.

Epic.Fail.

Now, do you have something to say about the cost of phosphorus regulations on consumers yet?

John Foust said...

What's the cost of the diminishment of the quality of a waterway or a water supply? If I knew the number you've asked, surely we should compare it to that.