> Attitudes pretty much fall into two categories:

Strawman fallacy. As someone in another thread recently said, "It is not WHETHER these kinds of activities can be regulated, but WHO should have the authority to regulate."

The fight over the EPA's WOTUS interpretation is about whether the EPA's rulemaking fit within their statutory mandate (and whether that mandate fits within the constitutional framework of "limited and enumerated powers") or whether these are responsibilities and local interests which state and local authorities are perfectly capable of protecting. There are reasonable arguments on both sides of the debate but THAT is the actual disagreement. It does not advance the debate to mis-characterize what the other side is really saying.



Mike Rossander



             ***********************************************

The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned

LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:

http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html